The Project Gutenberg EBook of A Compilation of the Messages and Papers of
the Presidents: Tyler, by Compiled by James D. Richardson

This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.net


Title: A Compilation of the Messages and Papers of the Presidents: Tyler
       Section 2 (of 3) of Volume 4: John Tyler

Author: Compiled by James D. Richardson

Release Date: May 28, 2004 [EBook #12464]

Language: English

Character set encoding: ASCII

*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK PAPERS OF THE PRESIDENTS: TYLER ***




Produced by Juliet Sutherland, David Garcia and the Online Distributed
Proofreading Team.





A COMPILATION OF THE MESSAGES AND PAPERS OF THE PRESIDENTS

BY JAMES D. RICHARDSON


John Tyler

April 4, 1841, to March 4, 1845




John Tyler

JOHN TYLER, second son of Judge John Tyler, governor of Virginia from
1808 to 1811, and Mary Armistead, was born at Greenway, Charles City
County, Va., March 29, 1790. He was graduated at William and Mary
College in 1807. At college he showed a strong interest in ancient
history; was also fond of poetry and music, and was a skillful performer
on the violin. In 1809 he was admitted to the bar, and had already begun
to obtain a good practice when he was elected to the legislature. Took
his seat in that body in December, 1811. Was here a firm supporter of
Mr. Madison's Administration; and the war with Great Britain, which
soon followed, afforded him an opportunity to become conspicuous as
a forcible and persuasive orator. March 29, 1813, he married Letitia,
daughter of Robert Christian, and a few weeks afterwards was called
into the field at the head of a company of militia to take part in the
defense of Richmond, threatened by the British. This military service
lasted but a month. He was reelected to the legislature annually until,
in November, 1816, he was chosen to fill a vacancy in the United States
House of Representatives. Was reelected to the Fifteenth and Sixteenth
Congresses. In 1821, his health being seriously impaired, he declined
a reelection and retired to private life. In 1823 he was again elected
to the Virginia legislature. Here he was a friend to the candidacy of
William H. Crawford for the Presidency. In 1824 he was a candidate to
fill a vacancy in the United States Senate, but was defeated. He opposed
in 1825 the attempt to remove William and Mary College to Richmond, and
was afterwards made successively rector and chancellor of the college,
which prospered signally under his management. In December, 1825, he was
chosen by the legislature to the governorship of Virginia, and in the
following year was reelected by a unanimous vote. In December, 1826, the
friends of Clay and Adams combined with the Democrats opposed to John
Randolph and elected Mr. Tyler to the United States Senate. In February,
1830, after taking part in the Virginia convention for revising the
State constitution, he returned to his seat in the Senate, and found
himself first drawn toward Jackson by the veto message (May 27) upon the
Maysville turnpike bill; supported Jackson in the Presidential election
of 1832, but broke with the Administration on the question of the
removal of the deposits from the United States Bank, and voted for Mr.
Clay's resolution to censure the President. He was nominated by the
State-rights Whigs for Vice-President in 1835, and at the election on
November 8, 1836, received 47 electoral votes; but no candidate having
a majority of electoral votes, the Senate elected Richard M. Johnson,
of Kentucky. The legislature of Virginia having instructed the Senators
from that State to vote for expunging the resolutions of censure upon
President Jackson, Mr. Tyler refused to obey the instructions, resigned
his seat, and returned home February 29, 1836. On January 10, 1838,
he was chosen president of the Virginia Colonization Society. In the
spring of 1838 he was returned to the Virginia legislature. In January,
1839, he was a candidate for reelection to the United States Senate;
the result was a deadlock, and the question was indefinitely postponed
before any choice had been made. December 4, 1839, the Whig national
convention, at Harrisburg, Pa., nominated him for Vice-President on the
ticket with William Henry Harrison, and at the election on November 10,
1840, he was elected, receiving 234 electoral votes to 48 for Richard M.
Johnson, of Kentucky. By the death of President Harrison April 4, 1841,
Mr. Tyler became President of the United States. He took the oath of
office on April 6. Among the more important events of his Administration
were the "Ashburton treaty" with Great Britain, the termination of
the Indian war in Florida, the passage of the resolutions by Congress
providing for the annexation of Texas, and the treaty with China. On May
27, 1844, he was nominated for President at a convention in Baltimore,
but although at first he accepted the nomination, he subsequently
withdrew his name. On June 26, 1844, Mr. Tyler married Miss Julia
Gardiner, of New York, his first wife having died September 9, 1842.
After leaving the White House he took up his residence on his estate,
Sherwood Forest, near Greenway, Va., on the bank of the James River. Was
president of the Peace Convention held at Washington February 4, 1861.
Afterwards, as a delegate to the Virginia State convention, he advocated
the passage of an ordinance of secession. In May, 1861, he was
unanimously elected a member of the provisional congress of the
Confederate States. In the following autumn he was elected to the
permanent congress, but died at Richmond January 18, 1862, before
taking his seat, and was buried in Hollywood Cemetery, in that city.

       *       *       *       *       *




INAUGURAL ADDRESS.


WASHINGTON, _April 9, 1841_.

_To the People of the United States_.

FELLOW-CITIZENS: Before my arrival at the seat of Government the painful
communication was made to you by the officers presiding over the several
Departments of the deeply regretted death of William Henry Harrison,
late President of the United States. Upon him you had conferred your
suffrages for the first office in your gift, and had selected him as
your chosen instrument to correct and reform all such errors and abuses
as had manifested themselves from time to time in the practical
operation of the Government. While standing at the threshold of this
great work he has by the dispensation of an all-wise Providence been
removed from amongst us, and by the provisions of the Constitution the
efforts to be directed to the accomplishing of this vitally important
task have devolved upon myself. This same occurrence has subjected the
wisdom and sufficiency of our institutions to a new test. For the first
time in our history the person elected to the Vice-Presidency of the
United States, by the happening of a contingency provided for in the
Constitution, has had devolved upon him the Presidential office.
The spirit of faction, which is directly opposed to the spirit of
a lofty patriotism, may find in this occasion for assaults upon my
Administration; and in succeeding, under circumstances so sudden
and unexpected and to responsibilities so greatly augmented, to the
administration of public affairs I shall place in the intelligence and
patriotism of the people my only sure reliance. My earnest prayer shall
be constantly addressed to the all-wise and all-powerful Being who
made me, and by whose dispensation I am called to the high office
of President of this Confederacy, understandingly to carry out the
principles of that Constitution which I have sworn "to protect,
preserve, and defend."

The usual opportunity which is afforded to a Chief Magistrate upon his
induction to office of presenting to his countrymen an exposition of the
policy which would guide his Administration, in the form of an inaugural
address, not having, under the peculiar circumstances which have brought
me to the discharge of the high duties of President of the United
States, been afforded to me, a brief exposition of the principles which
will govern me in the general course of my administration of public
affairs would seem to be due as well to myself as to you.

In regard to foreign nations, the groundwork of my policy will be
justice on our part to all, submitting to injustice from none. While
I shall sedulously cultivate the relations of peace and amity with one
and all, it will be my most imperative duty to see that the honor of the
country shall sustain no blemish. With a view to this, the condition of
our military defenses will become a matter of anxious solicitude. The
Army, which has in other days covered itself with renown, and the Navy,
not inappropriately termed the right arm of the public defense, which
has spread a light of glory over the American standard in all the waters
of the earth, should be rendered replete with efficiency.

In view of the fact, well avouched by history, that the tendency of all
human institutions is to concentrate power in the hands of a single man,
and that their ultimate downfall has proceeded from this cause, I deem
it of the most essential importance that a complete separation should
take place between the sword and the purse. No matter where or how the
public moneys shall be deposited, so long as the President can exert the
power of appointing and removing at his pleasure the agents selected for
their custody the Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy is in fact the
treasurer. A permanent and radical change should therefore be decreed.
The patronage incident to the Presidential office, already great, is
constantly increasing. Such increase is destined to keep pace with the
growth of our population, until, without a figure of speech, an army
of officeholders may be spread over the land. The unrestrained power
exerted by a selfishly ambitious man in order either to perpetuate his
authority or to hand it over to some favorite as his successor may lead
to the employment of all the means within his control to accomplish his
object. The right to remove from office, while subjected to no just
restraint, is inevitably destined to produce a spirit of crouching
servility with the official corps, which, in order to uphold the hand
which feeds them, would lead to direct and active interference in the
elections, both State and Federal, thereby subjecting the course of
State legislation to the dictation of the chief executive officer and
making the will of that officer absolute and supreme. I will at a proper
time invoke the action of Congress upon this subject, and shall readily
acquiesce in the adoption of all proper measures which are calculated to
arrest these evils, so full of danger in their tendency. I will remove
no incumbent from office who has faithfully and honestly acquitted
himself of the duties of his office, except in such cases where
such officer has been guilty of an active partisanship or by secret
means--the less manly, and therefore the more objectionable--has given
his official influence to the purposes of party, thereby bringing the
patronage of the Government in conflict with the freedom of elections.
Numerous removals may become necessary under this rule. These will
be made by me through no acerbity of feeling--I have had no cause to
cherish or indulge unkind feelings toward any--but my conduct will be
regulated by a profound sense of what is due to the country and its
institutions; nor shall I neglect to apply the same unbending rule
to those of my own appointment. Freedom of opinion will be tolerated,
the full enjoyment of the right of suffrage will be maintained as the
birthright of every American citizen; but I say emphatically to the
official corps, "Thus far and no farther." I have dwelt the longer upon
this subject because removals from office are likely often to arise,
and I would have my countrymen to understand the principle of the
Executive action.

In all public expenditures the most rigid economy should be resorted to,
and, as one of its results, a public debt in time of peace be sedulously
avoided. A wise and patriotic constituency will never object to the
imposition of necessary burdens for useful ends, and true wisdom
dictates the resort to such means in order to supply deficiencies in the
revenue, rather than to those doubtful expedients which, ultimating in
a public debt, serve to embarrass the resources of the country and to
lessen its ability to meet any great emergency which may arise. All
sinecures should be abolished. The appropriations should be direct
and explicit, so as to leave as limited a share of discretion to the
disbursing agents as may be found compatible with the public service.
A strict responsibility on the part of all the agents of the Government
should be maintained and peculation or defalcation visited with
immediate expulsion from office and the most condign punishment.

The public interest also demands that if any war has existed between
the Government and the currency it shall cease. Measures of a financial
character now having the sanction of legal enactment shall be faithfully
enforced until repealed by the legislative authority. But I owe it to
myself to declare that I regard existing enactments as unwise and
impolitic and in a high degree oppressive. I shall promptly give my
sanction to any constitutional measure which, originating in Congress,
shall have for its object the restoration of a sound circulating medium,
so essentially necessary to give confidence in all the transactions
of life, to secure to industry its just and adequate rewards, and to
reestablish the public prosperity. In deciding upon the adaptation of
any such measure to the end proposed, as well as its conformity to the
Constitution, I shall resort to the fathers of the great republican
school for advice and instruction, to be drawn from their sage views of
our system of government and the light of their ever-glorious example.

The institutions under which we live, my countrymen, secure each person
in the perfect enjoyment of all his rights. The spectacle is exhibited
to the world of a government deriving its powers from the consent of the
governed and having imparted to it only so much power as is necessary
for its successful operation. Those who are charged with its
administration should carefully abstain from all attempts to enlarge
the range of powers thus granted to the several departments of the
Government other than by an appeal to the people for additional grants,
lest by so doing they disturb that balance which the patriots and
statesmen who framed the Constitution designed to establish between the
Federal Government and the States composing the Union. The observance
of these rules is enjoined upon us by that feeling of reverence and
affection which finds a place in the heart of every patriot for the
preservation of union and the blessings of union--for the good of our
children and our children's children through countless generations.
An opposite course could not fail to generate factions intent upon
the gratification of their selfish ends, to give birth to local and
sectional jealousies, and to ultimate either in breaking asunder the
bonds of union or in building up a central system which would inevitably
end in a bloody scepter and an iron crown.

In conclusion I beg you to be assured that I shall exert myself to carry
the foregoing principles into practice during my administration of the
Government, and, confiding in the protecting care of an everwatchful and
overruling Providence, it shall be my first and highest duty to preserve
unimpaired the free institutions under which we live and transmit them
to those who shall succeed me in their full force and vigor.

JOHN TYLER.


[For proclamation of President Tyler recommending, in consequence of the
death of President Harrison, a day of fasting and prayer, see p. 32.]




SPECIAL SESSION MESSAGE.


WASHINGTON, _June 1, 1841_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States_.

FELLOW CITIZENS: You have been assembled in your respective halls of
legislation under a proclamation bearing the signature of the
illustrious citizen who was so lately called by the direct suffrages of
the people to the discharge of the important functions of their chief
executive office. Upon the expiration of a single month from the day of
his installation he has paid the great debt of nature, leaving behind
him a name associated with the recollection of numerous benefits
conferred upon the country during a long life of patriotic devotion.
With this public bereavement are connected other considerations which
will not escape the attention of Congress. The preparations necessary
for his removal to the seat of Government in view of a residence of four
years must have devolved upon the late President heavy expenditures,
which, if permitted to burthen the limited resources of his private
fortune, may tend seriously to the embarrassment of his surviving
family; and it is therefore respectfully submitted to Congress whether
the ordinary principles of justice would not dictate the propriety of
its legislative interposition. By the provisions of the fundamental law
the powers and duties of the high station to which he was elected have
devolved upon me, and in the dispositions of the representatives of the
States and of the people will be found, to a great extent, a solution of
the problem to which our institutions are for the first time subjected.

In entering upon the duties of this office I did not feel that it would
be becoming in me to disturb what had been ordered by my lamented
predecessor. Whatever, therefore, may have been my opinion originally as
to the propriety of convening Congress at so early a day from that of
its late adjournment, I found a new and controlling inducement not to
interfere with the patriotic desires of the late President in the
novelty of the situation in which I was so unexpectedly placed. My first
wish under such circumstances would necessarily have been to have called
to my aid in the administration of public affairs the combined wisdom of
the two Houses of Congress, in order to take their counsel and advice as
to the best mode of extricating the Government and the country from the
embarrassments weighing heavily on both. I am, then, most happy in
finding myself so soon after my accession to the Presidency surrounded
by the immediate representatives of the States and people.

No important changes having taken place in our foreign relations since
the last session of Congress, it is not deemed necessary on this
occasion to go into a detailed statement in regard to them. I am happy
to say that I see nothing to destroy the hope of being able to preserve
peace, The ratification of the treaty with Portugal has been duly
exchanged between the two Governments. This Government has not been
inattentive to the interests of those of our citizens who have claims on
the Government of Spain founded on express treaty stipulations, and a
hope is indulged that the representations which have been made to that
Government on this subject may lead ere long to beneficial results.

A correspondence has taken place between the Secretary of State and the
minister of Her Britannic Majesty accredited to this Government on the
subject of Alexander McLeod's indictment and imprisonment, copies of
which are herewith communicated to Congress.

In addition to what appears from these papers, it may be proper to state
that Alexander McLeod has been heard by the supreme court of the State
of New York on his motion to be discharged from imprisonment, and that
the decision of that court has not as yet been pronounced.

The Secretary of State has addressed to me a paper upon two subjects
interesting to the commerce of the country, which will receive my
consideration, and which I have the honor to communicate to Congress.

So far as it depends on the course of this Government, our relations of
good will and friendship will be sedulously cultivated with all nations.
The true American policy will be found to consist in the exercise of
a spirit of justice, to be manifested in the discharge of all our
international obligations to the weakest of the family of nations as
well as to the most powerful. Occasional conflicts of opinion may arise,
but when the discussions incident to them are conducted in the language
of truth and with a strict regard to justice the scourge of war will for
the most part be avoided. The time ought to be regarded as having gone
by when a resort to arms is to be esteemed as the only proper arbiter
of national differences.

The census recently taken shows a regularly progressive increase in
our population. Upon the breaking out of the War of the Revolution
our numbers scarcely equaled 3,000,000 souls; they already exceed
17,000,000, and will continue to progress in a ratio which duplicates in
a period of about twenty-three years. The old States contain a territory
sufficient in itself to maintain a population of additional millions,
and the most populous of the new States may even yet be regarded as but
partially settled, while of the new lands on this side of the Rocky
Mountains, to say nothing of the immense region which stretches from
the base of those mountains to the mouth of the Columbia River, about
770,000,000 acres, ceded and unceded, still remain to be brought into
market. We hold out to the people of other countries an invitation to
come and settle among us as members of our rapidly growing family, and
for the blessings which we offer them we require of them to look upon
our country as their country and to unite with us in the great task of
preserving our institutions and thereby perpetuating our liberties. No
motive exists for foreign conquest; we desire but to reclaim our almost
illimitable wildernesses and to introduce into their depths the lights
of civilization. While we shall at all times be prepared to vindicate
the national honor, our most earnest desire will be to maintain an
unbroken peace.

In presenting the foregoing views I can not withhold the expression of
the opinion that there exists nothing in the extension of our Empire
over our acknowledged possessions to excite the alarm of the patriot for
the safety of our institutions. The federative system, leaving to each
State the care of its domestic concerns and devolving on the Federal
Government those of general import, admits in safety of the greatest
expansion; but at the same time I deem it proper to add that there will
be found to exist at all times an imperious necessity for restraining
all the functionaries of this Government within the range of their
respective powers, thereby preserving a just balance between the powers
granted to this Government and those reserved to the States and to the
people.

From the report of the Secretary of the Treasury you will perceive that
the fiscal means, present and accruing, are insufficient to supply the
wants of the Government for the current year. The balance in the
Treasury on the 4th day of March last not covered by outstanding drafts,
and exclusive of trust funds, is estimated at $860,000. This includes
the sum of $215,000 deposited in the Mint and its branches to procure
metal for coining and in process of coinage, and which could not be
withdrawn without inconvenience, thus leaving subject to draft in the
various depositories the sum of $645,000. By virtue of two several acts
of Congress the Secretary of the Treasury was authorized to issue on and
after the 4th day of March last Treasury notes to the amount of
$5,413,000, making an aggregate available fund of $6,058,000 on hand.

But this fund was chargeable, with outstanding Treasury notes redeemable
in the current year and interest thereon, to the estimated amount of
$5,280,000. There is also thrown upon the Treasury the payment of a
large amount of demands accrued in whole or in part in former years,
which will exhaust the available means of the Treasury and leave the
accruing revenue, reduced as it is in amount, burthened with debt and
charged with the current expenses of the Government.

The aggregate amount of outstanding appropriations on the 4th day of
March last was $33,429,616.50, of which $24,210,000 will be required
during the current year; and there will also be required for the
use of the War Department additional appropriations to the amount of
$2,511,132.98, the special objects of which will be seen by reference
to the report of the Secretary of War. The anticipated means of the
Treasury are greatly inadequate to this demand. The receipts from
customs for the last three quarters of the last year and first quarter
of the present year amounted to $12,100,000; the receipts for lands
for the same time to $2,742,450, shewing an average revenue from both
sources of $1,236,870 per month.

A gradual expansion of trade, growing out of a restoration of
confidence, together with a reduction in the expenses of collecting and
punctuality on the part of collecting officers, may cause an addition
to the monthly receipts from the customs. They are estimated for the
residue of the year from the 4th of March at $12,000,000. The receipts
from the public lands for the same time are estimated at $2,500,000, and
from miscellaneous sources at $170,000, making an aggregate of available
fund within the year of $15,315,000, which will leave a probable deficit
of $11,406,132.98. To meet this some temporary provision is necessary
until the amount can be absorbed by the excess of revenues which are
anticipated to accrue at no distant day.

There will fall due within the next three months Treasury notes of
the issues of 1840, including interest, about $2,850,000. There is
chargeable in the same period for arrearages for taking the Sixth Census
$294,000, and the estimated expenditures for the current service are
about $8,100,000, making the aggregate demand upon the Treasury prior
to the 1st of September next about $11,340,000.

The ways and means in the Treasury and estimated to accrue within the
above-named period consist of about $694,000 of funds available on the
28th ultimo, an unissued balance of Treasury notes authorized by the act
of 1841 amounting to $1,955,000, and estimated receipts from all sources
of $3,800,000, making an aggregate of about $6,450,000, and leaving a
probable deficit on the 1st of September next of $4,845,000.

In order to supply the wants of the Government, an intelligent
constituency, in view of their best interests, will without hesitation
submit to all necessary burthens. But it is nevertheless important so to
impose them as to avoid defeating the just expectations of the country
growing out of preexisting laws. The act of the 2d of March, 1833,
commonly called the "compromise act," should not be altered except under
urgent necessities, which are not believed at this time to exist. One
year only remains to complete the series of reductions provided for by
that law, at which time provisions made by the same law, and which then
will be brought actively in aid of the manufacturing interests of the
Union, will not fail to produce the most beneficial results. Under a
system of discriminating duties imposed for purposes of revenue, in
unison with the provisions of existing laws, it is to be hoped that our
policy will in the future be fixed and permanent, so as to avoid those
constant fluctuations which defeat the very objects they have in view.
We shall thus best maintain a position which, while it will enable us
the more readily to meet the advances of other countries calculated to
promote our trade and commerce, will at the same time leave in our own
hands the means of retaliating with greater effect unjust regulations.

In intimate connection with the question of revenue is that which makes
provision for a suitable fiscal agent, capable of adding increased
facilities in the collection and disbursement of the public revenues,
rendering more secure their custody, and consulting a true economy
in the great, multiplied, and delicate operations of the Treasury
Department. Upon such an agent depends in an eminent degree the
establishment of a currency of uniform value, which is of so great
importance to all the essential interests of society, and on the wisdom
to be manifested in its creation much depends. So intimately interwoven
are its operations, not only with the interests of individuals, but of
States, that it may be regarded to a great degree as controlling both.
If paper be used as the chief medium of circulation, and the power be
vested in the Government of issuing it at pleasure, either in the form
of Treasury drafts or any other, or if banks be used as the public
depositories, with liberty to regard all surpluses from day to day as
so much added to their active capital, prices are exposed to constant
fluctuations and industry to severe suffering. In the one case political
considerations directed to party purposes may control, while excessive
cupidity may prevail in the other. The public is thus constantly liable
to imposition. Expansions and contractions may follow each other in
rapid succession--the one engendering a reckless spirit of adventure and
speculation, which embraces States as well as individuals, the other
causing a fall in prices and accomplishing an entire change in the
aspect of affairs. Stocks of all sorts rapidly decline, individuals
are ruined, and States embarrassed even in their efforts to meet with
punctuality the interest on their debts. Such, unhappily, is the
condition of things now existing in the United States. These effects may
readily be traced to the causes above referred to. The public revenues,
being removed from the then Bank of the United States, under an order of
a late President, were placed in selected State banks, which, actuated
by the double motive of conciliating the Government and augmenting their
profits to the greatest possible extent, enlarged extravagantly their
discounts, thus enabling all other existing banks to do the same; large
dividends were declared, which, stimulating the cupidity of capitalists,
caused a rush to be made to the legislatures of the respective States
for similar acts of incorporation, which by many of the States, under a
temporary infatuation, were readily granted, and thus the augmentation
of the circulating medium, consisting almost exclusively of paper,
produced a most fatal delusion. An illustration derived from the land
sales of the period alluded to will serve best to show the effect of the
whole system. The average sales of the public lands for a period of ten
years prior to 1834 had not much exceeded $2,000,000 per annum. In 1834
they attained in round numbers to the amount of $6,000,000; in the
succeeding year of 1835 they reached $16,000,000, and the next year of
1836 they amounted to the enormous sum of $25,000,000, thus crowding
into the short space of three years upward of twenty-three years'
purchase of the public domain. So apparent had become the necessity of
arresting this course of things that the executive department assumed
the highly questionable power of discriminating in the funds to be used
in payment by different classes of public debtors--a discrimination
which was doubtless designed to correct this most ruinous state of
things by the exaction of specie in all payments for the public lands,
but which could not at once arrest the tide which had so strongly set
in. Hence the demands for specie became unceasing, and corresponding
prostration rapidly ensued under the necessities created with the banks
to curtail their discounts and thereby to reduce their circulation.
I recur to these things with no disposition to censure preexisting
Administrations of the Government, but simply in exemplification of the
truth of the position which I have assumed. If, then, any fiscal agent
which may be created shall be placed, without due restrictions, either
in the hands of the administrators of the Government or those of private
individuals, the temptation to abuse will prove to be resistless.
Objects of political aggrandizement may seduce the first, and the
promptings of a boundless cupidity will assail the last. Aided by the
experience of the past, it will be the pleasure of Congress so to guard
and fortify the public interests in the creation of any new agent as to
place them, so far as human wisdom can accomplish it, on a footing of
perfect security. Within a few years past three different schemes have
been before the country. The charter of the Bank of the United States
expired by its own limitations in 1836. An effort was made to renew
it, which received the sanction of the two Houses of Congress, but the
then President of the United States exercised his _veto_ power and the
measure was defeated. A regard to truth requires me to say that the
President was fully sustained in the course he had taken by the popular
voice. His successor to the chair of state unqualifiedly pronounced his
opposition to any new charter of a similar institution, and not only the
popular election which brought him into power, but the elections through
much of his term, seemed clearly to indicate a concurrence with him
in sentiment on the part of the people. After the public moneys were
withdrawn from the United States Bank they were placed in deposit with
the State banks, and the result of that policy has been before the
country. To say nothing as to the question whether that experiment
was made under propitious or adverse circumstances, it may safely be
asserted that it did receive the unqualified condemnation of most of its
early advocates, and, it is believed, was also condemned by the popular
sentiment. The existing subtreasury system does not seem to stand in
higher favor with the people, but has recently been condemned in a
manner too plainly indicated to admit of a doubt. Thus in the short
period of eight years the popular voice may be regarded as having
successively condemned each of the three schemes of finance to which
I have adverted. As to the first, it was introduced at a time (1816)
when the State banks, then comparatively few in number, had been forced
to suspend specie payments by reason of the war which had previously
prevailed with Great Britain. Whether if the United States Bank charter,
which expired in 1811, had been renewed in due season it would have been
enabled to continue specie payments during the war and the disastrous
period to the commerce of the country which immediately succeeded is, to
say the least, problematical, and whether the United States Bank of 1816
produced a restoration of specie payments or the same was accomplished
through the instrumentality of other means was a matter of some
difficulty at that time to determine. Certain it is that for the first
years of the operation of that bank its course was as disastrous as
for the greater part of its subsequent career it became eminently
successful. As to the second, the experiment was tried with a redundant
Treasury, which continued to increase until it seemed to be the part
of wisdom to distribute the surplus revenue among the States, which,
operating at the same time with the specie circular and the causes
before adverted to, caused them to suspend specie payments and involved
the country in the greatest embarrassment. And as to the third, if
carried through all the stages of its transmutation from paper and
specie to nothing but the precious metals, to say nothing of the
insecurity of the public moneys, its injurious effects have been
anticipated by the country in its unqualified condemnation. What is now
to be regarded as the judgment of the American people on this whole
subject I have no accurate means of determining but by appealing to
their more immediate representatives. The late contest, which terminated
in the election of General Harrison to the Presidency, was decided on
principles well known and openly declared, and while the subtreasury
received in the result the most decided condemnation, yet no other
scheme of finance seemed to have been concurred in. To you, then, who
have come more directly from the body of our common constituents, I
submit the entire question, as best qualified to give a full exposition
of their wishes and opinions. I shall be ready to concur with you in the
adoption of such system as you may propose, reserving to myself the
ultimate power of rejecting any measure which may, in my view of it,
conflict with the Constitution or otherwise jeopardize the prosperity of
the country--a power which I could not part with even if I would, but
which I will not believe any act of yours will call into requisition.

I can not avoid recurring, in connection with this subject, to the
necessity which exists for adopting some suitable measure whereby the
unlimited creation of banks by the States may be corrected in future.
Such result can be most readily achieved by the consent of the States,
to be expressed in the form of a compact among themselves, which
they can only enter into with the consent and approbation of this
Government--a consent which might in the present emergency of the
public demands justifiably be given by Congress in advance of any action
by the States, as an inducement to such action, upon terms well defined
by the act of tender. Such a measure, addressing itself to the calm
reflection of the States, would find in the experience of the past and
the condition of the present much to sustain it; and it is greatly to be
doubted whether any scheme of finance can prove for any length of time
successful while the States shall continue in the unrestrained exercise
of the power of creating banking corporations. This power can only be
limited by their consent.

With the adoption of a financial agency of a satisfactory character the
hope may be indulged that the country may once more return to a state of
prosperity. Measures auxiliary thereto, and in some measure inseparably
connected with its success, will doubtless claim the attention of
Congress. Among such, a distribution of the proceeds of the sales of the
public lands, provided such distribution does not force upon Congress
the necessity of imposing upon commerce heavier burthens than those
contemplated by the act of 1833, would act as an efficient remedial
measure by being brought directly in aid of the States. As one sincerely
devoted to the task of preserving a just balance in our system of
Government by the maintenance of the States in a condition the most free
and respectable and in the full possession of all their power, I can no
otherwise than feel desirous for their emancipation from the situation
to which the pressure on their finances now subjects them. And while I
must repudiate, as a measure founded in error and wanting constitutional
sanction, the slightest approach to an assumption by this Government of
the debts of the States, yet I can see in the distribution adverted to
much to recommend it. The compacts between the proprietor States and
this Government expressly guarantee to the States all the benefits which
may arise from the sales. The mode by which this is to be effected
addresses itself to the discretion of Congress as the trustee for the
States, and its exercise after the most beneficial manner is restrained
by nothing in the grants or in the Constitution so long as Congress
shall consult that equality in the distribution which the compacts
require. In the present condition of some of the States the question of
distribution may be regarded as substantially a question between direct
and indirect taxation. If the distribution be not made in some form
or other, the necessity will daily become more urgent with the debtor
States for a resort to an oppressive system of direct taxation, or their
credit, and necessarily their power and influence, will be greatly
diminished. The payment of taxes after the most inconvenient and
oppressive mode will be exacted in place of contributions for the most
part voluntarily made, and therefore comparatively unoppressive. The
States are emphatically the constituents of this Government, and we
should be entirely regardless of the objects held in view by them in
the creation of this Government if we could be indifferent to their
good. The happy effects of such a measure upon all the States would
immediately be manifested. With the debtor States it would effect the
relief to a great extent of the citizens from a heavy burthen of direct
taxation, which presses with severity on the laboring classes, and
eminently assist in restoring the general prosperity. An immediate
advance would take place in the price of the State securities, and the
attitude of the States would become once more, as it should ever be,
lofty and erect. With States laboring under no extreme pressure from
debt, the fund which they would derive from this source would enable
them to improve their condition in an eminent degree. So far as this
Government is concerned, appropriations to domestic objects approaching
in amount the revenue derived from the land sales might be abandoned,
and thus a system of unequal, and therefore unjust, legislation would
be substituted by one dispensing equality to all the members of this
Confederacy. Whether such distribution should be made directly to the
States in the proceeds of the sales or in the form of profits by virtue
of the operations of any fiscal agency having those proceeds as its
basis, should such measure be contemplated by Congress, would well
deserve its consideration. Nor would such disposition of the proceeds of
the sales in any manner prevent Congress from time to time from passing
all necessary preemption laws for the benefit of actual settlers, or
from making any new arrangement as to the price of the public lands
which might in future be esteemed desirable.

I beg leave particularly to call your attention to the accompanying
report from the Secretary of War. Besides the present state of the war
which has so long afflicted the Territory of Florida, and the various
other matters of interest therein referred to, you will learn from it
that the Secretary has instituted an inquiry into abuses, which promises
to develop gross enormities in connection with Indian treaties which
have been negotiated, as well as in the expenditures for the removal and
subsistence of the Indians. He represents also other irregularities
of a serious nature that have grown up in the practice of the Indian
Department, which will require the appropriation of upward of $200,000
to correct, and which claim the immediate attention of Congress.

In reflecting on the proper means of defending the country we can not
shut our eyes to the consequences which the introduction and use of the
power of steam upon the ocean are likely to produce in wars between
maritime states. We can not yet see the extent to which this power may
be applied in belligerent operations, connecting itself as it does with
recent improvements in the science of gunnery and projectiles; but we
need have no fear of being left, in regard to these things, behind the
most active and skillful of other nations if the genius and enterprise
of our fellow-citizens receive proper encouragement and direction from
Government.

True wisdom would nevertheless seem to dictate the necessity of placing
in perfect condition those fortifications which are designed for the
protection of our principal cities and roadsteads. For the defense of
our extended maritime coast our chief reliance should be placed on
our Navy, aided by those inventions which are destined to recommend
themselves to public adoption, but no time should be lost in placing our
principal cities on the seaboard and the Lakes in a state of entire
security from foreign assault. Separated as we are from the countries of
the Old World, and in much unaffected by their policy, we are happily
relieved from the necessity of maintaining large standing armies in
times of peace. The policy which was adopted by Mr. Monroe shortly after
the conclusion of the late war with Great Britain of preserving a
regularly organized staff sufficient for the command of a large military
force should a necessity for one arise is founded as well in economy as
in true wisdom. Provision is thus made, upon filling up the rank and
file, which can readily be done on any emergency, for the introduction
of a system of discipline both promptly and efficiently. All that is
required in time of peace is to maintain a sufficient number of men
to guard our fortifications, to meet any sudden contingency, and to
encounter the first shock of war. Our chief reliance must be placed on
the militia; they constitute the great body of national guards, and,
inspired by an ardent love of country, will be found ready at all times
and at all seasons to repair with alacrity to its defense. It will be
regarded by Congress, I doubt not, at a suitable time as one of its
highest duties to attend to their complete organization and discipline.

The state of the navy pension fund requires the immediate attention of
Congress. By the operation of the act of the 3d of March, 1837, entitled
"An act for the more equitable administration of the navy pension fund,"
that fund has been exhausted. It will be seen from the accompanying
report of the Commissioner of Pensions that there will be required for
the payment of navy pensions on the 1st of July next $88,706.06-1/3, and
on the 1st of January, 1842, the sum of $69,000. In addition to these
sums, about $6,000 will be required to pay arrears of pensions which
will probably be allowed between the 1st of July and the 1st of January,
1842, making in the whole $163,706.06-1/3. To meet these payments there
is within the control of the Department the sum of $28,040, leaving a
deficiency of $139,666.06-1/3. The public faith requires that immediate
provision should be made for the payment of these sums.

In order to introduce into the Navy a desirable efficiency, a new system
of accountability may be found to be indispensably necessary. To mature
a plan having for its object the accomplishment of an end so important
and to meet the just expectations of the country require more time than
has yet been allowed to the Secretary at the head of the Department. The
hope is indulged that by the time of your next regular session measures
of importance in connection with this branch of the public service may
be matured for your consideration.

Although the laws regulating the Post-Office Department only require
from the officer charged with its direction to report at the usual
annual session of Congress, the Postmaster-General has presented to me
some facts connected with the financial condition of the Department
which are deemed worthy the attention of Congress. By the accompanying
report of that officer it appears the existing liabilities of that
Department beyond the means of payment at its command can not be less
than $500,000. As the laws organizing that branch of the public service
confine the expenditure to its own revenues, deficiencies therein
can not be presented under the usual estimates for the expenses of
Government. It must therefore be left to Congress to determine whether
the moneys now due the contractors shall be paid from the public
Treasury or whether that Department shall continue under its present
embarrassments. It will be seen by the report of the Postmaster-General
that the recent lettings of contracts in several of the States have been
made at such reduced rates of compensation as to encourage the belief
that if the Department was relieved from existing difficulties its
future operations might be conducted without any further call upon the
general Treasury.

The power of appointing to office is one of a character the most
delicate and responsible. The appointing power is evermore exposed to be
led into error. With anxious solicitude to select the most trustworthy
for official station, I can not be supposed to possess a personal
knowledge of the qualifications of every applicant. I deem it,
therefore, proper in this most public manner to invite on the part of
the Senate a just scrutiny into the character and pretensions of every
person I may bring to their notice in the regular form of a nomination
for office. Unless persons every way trustworthy are employed in the
public service, corruption and irregularity will inevitably follow.
I shall with the greatest cheerfulness acquiesce in the decision of
that body, and, regarding it as wisely constituted to aid the executive
department in the performance of this delicate duty, I shall look to its
"consent and advice" as given only in furtherance of the best interests
of the country. I shall also at the earliest proper occasion invite the
attention of Congress to such measures as in my judgment will be best
calculated to regulate and control the Executive power in reference to
this vitally important subject.

I shall also at the proper season invite your attention to the
statutory enactments for the suppression of the slave trade, which may
require to be rendered more efficient in their provisions. There is
reason to believe that the traffic is on the increase. Whether such
increase is to be ascribed to the abolition of slave labor in the
British possessions in our vicinity and an attendant diminution in the
supply of those articles which enter into the general consumption of
the world, thereby augmenting the demand from other quarters, and thus
calling for additional labor, it were needless to inquire. The highest
considerations of public honor as well as the strongest promptings of
humanity require a resort to the most vigorous efforts to suppress the
trade.

In conclusion I beg to invite your particular attention to the interests
of this District; nor do I doubt but that in a liberal spirit of
legislation you will seek to advance its commercial as well as its local
interests. Should Congress deem it to be its duty to repeal the existing
subtreasury law, the necessity of providing a suitable place of deposit
of the public moneys which may be required within the District must be
apparent to all.

I have felt it due to the country to present the foregoing topics to
your consideration and reflection. Others with which it might not seem
proper to trouble you at an extraordinary session will be laid before
you at a future day. I am happy in committing the important affairs of
the country into your hands. The tendency of public sentiment, I am
pleased to believe, is toward the adoption, in a spirit of union and
harmony, of such measures as will fortify the public interests. To
cherish such a tendency of public opinion is the task of an elevated
patriotism. That differences of opinion as to the means of accomplishing
these desirable objects should exist is reasonably to be expected. Nor
can all be made satisfied with any system of measures; but I flatter
myself with the hope that the great body of the people will readily
unite in support of those whose efforts spring from a disinterested
desire to promote their happiness, to preserve the Federal and State
Governments within their respective orbits; to cultivate peace with
all the nations of the earth on just and honorable grounds; to exact
obedience to the laws; to intrench liberty and property in full
security; and, consulting the most rigid economy, to abolish all
useless expenses.

JOHN TYLER.




SPECIAL MESSAGES.


CITY OF WASHINGTON, _June 2, 1841_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a report from the Secretary of the Treasury,
exhibiting certain transfers of appropriations that have been made in
that Department in pursuance of the power vested in the President of the
United States by the act of Congress of the 3d of March, 1809, entitled
"An act further to amend the several acts for the establishment and
regulation of the Treasury, War, and Navy Departments."

JOHN TYLER.


WASHINGTON, _June 17, 1841_.

_To the Senate of the United States_

I transmit to the Senate the inclosed communication[1] from the
Secretary of State, in answer to a resolution of the Senate of the 12th
instant.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 1: Relating to the commissioners appointed to investigate the
condition of the public works in Washington, D.C., and transmitting
copy of the letter of instructions issued to them.]



WASHINGTON, _June 17, 1841_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit to the Senate the inclosed communication from the Secretary
of State, in answer to a resolution of the Senate of the 12th instant.

JOHN TYLER.



DEPARTMENT OF STATE, _June 15, 1841_.

The PRESIDENT.

SIR: In answer to the resolution of the Senate of the 12th instant,
calling for "any orders which may have been issued to the officers of
the Army and Navy in relation to political offenses in elections," etc.,
I inclose a copy of the circular letter addressed, under the direction
of the President, by this Department to the heads of the other
Departments, and know of no other order to which the resolution can be
supposed to have reference.

I have the honor to be, your obedient servant,

DANIEL WEBSTER.



CIRCULAR.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE, _March 20, 1841_.

SIR: The President is of opinion that it is a great abuse to bring the
patronage of the General Government into conflict with the freedom of
elections, and that this abuse ought to be corrected wherever it may
have been permitted to exist, and to be prevented for the future.

He therefore directs that information be given to all officers and
agents in your department of the public service that partisan
interference in popular elections, whether of State officers or officers
of this Government, and for whomsoever or against whomsoever it may be
exercised, or the payment of any contribution or assessment on salaries,
or official compensation for party or election purposes, will be
regarded by him as cause of removal.

It is not intended that any officer shall be restrained in the free and
proper expression and maintenance of his opinions respecting public men
or public measures, or in the exercise to the fullest degree of the
constitutional right of suffrage. But persons employed under the
Government and paid for their services out of the public Treasury are
not expected to take an active or officious part in attempts to
influence the minds or votes of others, such conduct being deemed
inconsistent with the spirit of the Constitution and the duties of
public agents acting under it; and the President is resolved, so far as
depends upon him, that while the exercise of the elective franchise by
the people shall be free from undue influences of official station and
authority, opinion shall also be free among the officers and agents of
the Government.

The President wishes it further to be announced and distinctly
understood that from all collecting and disbursing officers promptitude
in rendering accounts and entire punctuality in paying balances will be
rigorously exacted. In his opinion it is time to return in this respect
to the early practice of the Government, and to hold any degree of
delinquency on the part of those intrusted with the public money just
cause of immediate removal. He deems the severe observance of this rule
to be essential to the public service, as every dollar lost to the
Treasury by unfaithfulness in office creates a necessity for a new
charge upon the people.

I have the honor to be, sir, your obedient servant,

DANIEL WEBSTER.



WASHINGTON, D.C., _June 18, 1841_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit to the Senate a report from the Secretary of the Navy, with
accompanying documents,[2] in answer to their resolution of the 12th
instant.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 2: Correspondence of the minister in England with the officers
of the Mediterranean Squadron, in consequence of which the squadron left
that station, and the dispatches of Captain Bolton to the Secretary of
the Navy connected with that movement.]



WASHINGTON, _June, 1841_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I have the honor to transmit to the Senate the accompanying letter[3]
from the Secretary of the Treasury, in pursuance of its resolution of the
8th instant.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 3: Relating to allowances since March 4, 1841, of claims
arising under the invasion of East Florida in 1812.]



WASHINGTON, _June 22, 1841_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States_:

I have the honor to submit the accompanying correspondence between
myself and the Hon. J. Burnet, J.C. Wright, and others, who arrived
some days ago in this city as a committee on behalf of the people of
Cincinnati for the purpose, with the assent of the family, of removing
the remains of the late President of the United States to North Bend for
interment. I have thought it to be my duty thus to apprise Congress of
the contemplated proceedings.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON CITY, _June 16, 1841_.

The PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

DEAR SIR: The undersigned were appointed by the citizens and the
city council of Cincinnati and by many of the surviving soldiers
of the late war to apply to the widow and family of our distinguished
fellow-citizen, the late President of the United States, for permission
to remove his remains from the city of Washington to the State of Ohio
for interment. They have made the application directed, and have
received permission to perform that sacred trust. They have now the
honor of reporting to you their arrival in this city, and of asking your
approbation of the measure contemplated and your cooperation in carrying
it into effect.

We are fully aware of the high estimate you placed on the talents and
virtues of our lamented friend and fellow-citizen, the late Chief
Magistrate of the Union, whose friendship and confidence you possessed
many years. We saw the tear fall from your eye and mingle with the tears
of the nation when the inscrutable will of Heaven removed him from us.

Knowing these things, we approach you with confidence, well assured that
you will justly appreciate our motive for undertaking the mournful duty
we have been deputed to perform, and that the same kind feeling which
has marked your course through life will prompt you on this occasion to
afford us your countenance, and, if necessary, your cooperation.

If it meet your approbation, the committee will do themselves the honor
of waiting upon you at the President's house at any hour you may please
to designate.

With high respect, we are, your friends and fellow-citizens,

J. BURNET.
  J.C. WRIGHT.
    [AND 10 OTHERS.]



WASHINGTON, _June 17, 1841_.

J. BURNET, J.C. WRIGHT, AND OTHERS OF THE COMMITTEE.

GENTLEMEN: Your letter of the 16th was duly handed me, and I lose
no time in responding to the feelings and sentiments which you have
expressed for yourselves and those you represent, and which you have
correctly ascribed to me in regard to the lamented death of the late
President. As a citizen I respected him; as a patriot I honored him;
as a friend he was near and dear to me. That the people of Cincinnati
should desire to keep watch over his remains by entombing them near
their city is both natural and becoming; that the entire West, where so
many evidences of his public usefulness are to be found, should unite in
the same wish was to have been expected; and that the surviving soldiers
of his many battles, led on by him to victory and to glory, should sigh
to perform the last melancholy duties to the remains of their old
commander is fully in consonance with the promptings of a noble and
generous sympathy. I could not, if I was authorized to do so, oppose
myself to their wishes. I might find something to urge on behalf of his
native State in my knowledge of his continued attachment to her through
the whole period of his useful life; in the claims of his relatives
there, whose desire it would be that the mortal remains of the
illustrious son should sleep under the same turf with those of his
distinguished father, one of the signers of the Declaration of
Independence; in the wish of the citizens of his native county to claim
all that is now left of him for whom they so lately cast their almost
unanimous suffrage; to say nothing of my own feelings, allied as I am
by blood to many of his near relatives, and with our names so closely
associated in much connected with the late exciting political contest.
These considerations might present some reasonable ground for opposing
your wishes; but the assent which has been given by his respected widow
and nearest relatives to the request of the people of Cincinnati admits
of no opposition on my part, neither in my individual nor official
character.

I shall feel it to be my duty, however, to submit our correspondence to
the two Houses of Congress, now in session, but anticipating no effort
from that quarter to thwart the wishes expressed by yourselves in
consonance with those of the widow and nearest relatives of the late
President. I readily promise you my cooperation toward enabling you to
fulfill the sacred trust which brought you to this city.

I tender to each of you, gentlemen, my cordial salutations.

JOHN TYLER.

[NOTE.--The remains of the late President of the United States were
removed from Washington to North Bend, Ohio, June 26, 1841.]



WASHINGTON, _June 29, 1841_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In compliance with the resolution of the Senate of the 14th instant, I
have the honor to submit the accompanying reports from the Secretary of
State and Secretary of the Treasury, which embrace all the information
possessed by the executive department upon that subject.[4]

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 4: Payment or assumption of State stocks by the General
Government.]



WASHINGTON, _June 30, 1841_.

_To the House of Representatives of the United States_:

The accompanying memorial in favor of the passage of a bankrupt law,
signed by nearly 3,000 of the inhabitants of the city of New York, has
been forwarded to me, attended by a request that I would submit it to
the consideration of Congress. I can not waive a compliance with a
request urged upon me by so large and respectable a number of my
fellow-citizens. That a bankrupt law, carefully guarded against
fraudulent practices and embracing as far as practicable all classes of
society--the failure to do which has heretofore constituted a prominent
objection to the measure--would afford extensive relief I do not doubt.
The distress incident to the derangements of some years past has visited
large numbers of our fellow-citizens with hopeless insolvency, whose
energies, both mental and physical, by reason of the load of debt
pressing upon them, are lost to the country. Whether Congress shall deem
it proper to enter upon the consideration of this subject at its present
extraordinary session it will doubtless wisely determine. I have
fulfilled my duty to the memorialists in submitting their petition to
your consideration.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _July 1, 1841_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I have the honor herewith to submit to the Senate the copy of a letter
addressed by myself to Mrs. Harrison in compliance with the resolutions
of Congress, and her reply thereto.

JOHN TYLER.

[The same message was sent to the House of Representatives.]



WASHINGTON, _June 13, 1841_.

Mrs. ANNA HARRISON.

MY DEAR MADAM: The accompanying resolutions, adopted by the Senate and
House of Representatives of the United States, will convey to you an
expression of the deep sympathy felt by the representatives of the
States and of the people in the sad bereavement which yourself and the
country have sustained in the death of your illustrious husband. It
may now be justly considered that the public archives constitute his
enduring monument, on which are inscribed in characters not to be
effaced the proudest evidences of public gratitude for services rendered
and of sorrow for his death. A great and united people shed their tears
over the bier of a devoted patriot and distinguished public benefactor.

In conveying to you, my dear madam, the profound respect of the two
Houses of Congress for your person and character, and their sincere
condolence on the late afflicting dispensation of Providence, permit me
to mingle my feelings with theirs and to tender you my fervent wishes
for your health, happiness, and long life.

JOHN TYLER.



A RESOLUTION manifesting the sensibility of Congress upon the event
of the death of William Henry Harrison, late President of the United
States.

The melancholy event of the death of William Henry Harrison, the late
President of the United States, having occurred during the recess of
Congress, and the two Houses sharing in the general grief and desiring
to manifest their sensibility upon the occasion of that public
bereavement: Therefore,

_Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress assembled_, That the chairs of the
President of the Senate and of the Speaker of the House of
Representatives be shrouded in black during the residue of the session,
and that the President _pro tempore_ of the Senate, the Speaker of the
House of Representatives, and the members and officers of both Houses
wear the usual badge of mourning for thirty days.

_Resolved_, That the President of the United States be requested to
transmit a copy of these resolutions to Mrs. Harrison, and to assure her
of the profound respect of the two Houses of Congress for her person and
character, and of their sincere condolence on the late afflicting
dispensation of Providence.



NORTH BEND, _June 24, 1841_.

His Excellency JOHN TYLER,

_President United States, Washington City, D.C._

DEAR SIR: I have received with sentiments of deep emotion the
resolutions of the Senate and House of Representatives which you have
done me the honor of forwarding, relative to the decease of my lamented
husband.

I can not sufficiently express the thanks I owe to the nation and its
assembled representatives for their condolence, so feelingly expressed,
of my individual calamity and the national bereavement; but, mingling my
tears with the sighs of the many patriots of the land, pray to Heaven
for the enduring happiness and prosperity of our beloved country.

ANNA HARRISON.



WASHINGTON, _July 3, 1841_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In compliance with a resolution of the Senate of the 9th instant
[ultimo], I communicate to that body a report from the Secretary of
State, conveying copies of the correspondence,[5] which contains all the
information called for by said resolution.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 5: Relating to the duties levied on American tobacco imported
into the States composing the German Commercial and Custom-House Union.]



WASHINGTON, _July 9, 1841_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit a report from the Secretary of State, in answer to the
resolution of the Senate of the 2d instant, calling for information as
to the progress and actual condition of the commission[6] under the
convention with the Mexican Republic.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 6: Appointed under the convention of April 11, 1839, for
adjusting the claims of citizens of the United States upon the Republic
of Mexico.]



WASHINGTON, _July, 14, 1841_.

_To the Speaker and Members of the House of Representatives_:

In compliance with a resolution of the House of Representatives of the
21st ultimo, I have the honor to submit the accompanying communication[7]
from the Secretary of State.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 7: Transmitting correspondence with Great Britain relative to
the seizure of American vessels by British armed cruisers under the
pretense that they were engaged in the slave trade; also correspondence
with N.P. Trist, United States consul at Habana, upon the subject of
the slave trade, etc.]



WASHINGTON, _July 16, 1841_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith transmit to the House of Representatives, in reply to their
resolution of the 21st ultimo, a report[8] from the Secretary of State,
with accompanying papers.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 8: Stating that there is no correspondence in his office
showing that any American citizens are British prisoners of state in Van
Diemens Land; transmitting correspondence with the British minister on
the subject of the detention or imprisonment of citizens of the United
States on account of occurrences in Canada, instructions issued to the
special agent appointed to inquire into such detention or imprisonment,
and report of said special agent.]



WASHINGTON, _July 19, 1841_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States_:

The act of Congress of the 10th of March, 1838, entitled "An act
supplementary to an act entitled 'An act in addition to the act for the
punishment of certain crimes against the United States and to repeal the
acts therein mentioned,' approved 20th of April, 1818," expired by its
own limitation on the 10th of March, 1840. The object of this act was to
make further provision for preventing military expeditions or
enterprises against the territory or dominions of any prince or state or
of any colony, district, or people conterminous with the United States
and with whom they are at peace, contrary to the act of April 20, 1818,
entitled "An act in addition to the act for the punishment of certain
crimes against the United States and to repeal the acts therein
mentioned."

The act of Congress of March 10, 1838, appears to have had a very
salutary effect, and it is respectfully recommended to Congress that it
be now revived or its provisions be reenacted.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _July 27, 1841_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States_:

I transmit herewith to Congress a communication from the Secretary of
State, on the subject of appropriations required for outfits and
salaries of diplomatic agents of the United States.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _August 2, 1841_.

_To the House of Representatives of the United States_:

On the 18th of February, 1832, the House of Representatives adopted a
resolution in the following words:

_Resolved_, That the President of the United States be authorized to
employ Horatio Greenough, of Massachusetts, to execute in marble a
full-length pedestrian statue of Washington, to be placed in the center
of the Rotunda of the Capitol; the head to be a copy of Houdon's
Washington, and the accessories to be left to the judgment of the
artist.

On the 23d of the same month the Secretary of State, by direction of
the President, addressed to Mr. Greenough a letter of instructions for
carrying into effect the resolution of the House.

On the 14th of July, 1832, an appropriation of the sum of $5,000 was
made "to enable the President of the United States to contract with
a skillful artist to execute in marble a pedestrian statue of George
Washington, to be placed in the center of the Rotunda of the Capitol,"
and several appropriations were made at the succeeding sessions in
furtherance of the same object.

Mr. Greenough, having been employed upon the work for several years at
Florence, completed it some months ago.

By a resolution of Congress of the 27th of May, 1840, it was directed
"that the Secretary of the Navy be authorized and instructed to take
measures for the importation and erection of the statue of Washington
by Greenough." In pursuance of this authority the Navy Department held
a correspondence with Commodore Hull, commanding on the Mediterranean
station, who entered into an agreement with the owners or master of the
ship _Sea_ for the transportation of the statue to the United States.
This ship, with the statue on board, arrived in this city on the 31st
ultimo, and now lies at the navy-yard.

As appropriations have become necessary for the payment of the freight
and other expenses, I communicate to Congress such papers as may enable
it to judge of the amount required.

JOHN TYLER.



AUGUST 3, 1841.

Hon. JOHN WHITE,

_Speaker of the House of Representatives_.

SIR: I herewith transmit a communication[9] received from the
Postmaster-General, to which I would invite the attention of Congress.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 9: Asking for a further appropriation for completing the new
General Post-Office building.]



AUGUST 3, 1841.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith transmit a report from the Secretary of the Treasury, to whom
I referred the resolution of the House calling for a communication[10]
addressed to him by the French minister.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 10: Relating to the commerce and navigation between France and
the United States.]



WASHINGTON, _August 6, 1841_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

In compliance with a resolution of the House of Representatives of the
16th of July, 1841, I communicate reports[11] from the several Executive
Departments, containing the information requested by said resolution.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 11: Transmitting list of officers deriving their appointments
from the nomination of the President and the concurrence of the Senate
who were removed from office since March 4, 1841, and also those who
were removed from March 4, 1829, to March 4, 1841.]



WASHINGTON, _August 25, 1841_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I herewith transmit to the Senate, in pursuance of their resolution of
the 22d ultimo, copies of the several reports of the commissioners
appointed in March last to examine into certain matters connected with
the public buildings in this city and the conduct of those employed in
their erection.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _August 27, 1841_.

_To the House of Representatives of the United States_:

I transmit herewith a letter from the Secretary of the Treasury, bearing
date this day, with the accompanying papers, in answer to the resolution
of the House of Representatives of the 16th ultimo, relative to removals
from office, etc.

These statements should have accompanied those from the other
Departments on the same subject transmitted in my message to the House
on the 7th ultimo,[12] but which have been delayed for reasons stated in
the letter of the Secretary of the Treasury above referred to.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 12: Not found. Evidently refers to message of August 6, 1841,
on preceding page.]



WASHINGTON, D.C., _September 1, 1841_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I submit to the Senate, for its consideration and constitutional action,
a treaty concluded at Oeyoowasha, on Minneesota (or St. Peters) River,
in the Territory of Iowa, on the 31st day of July last, between James
Duane Doty, commissioner on the part of the United States, and the
Seeseeahto, Wofpato, and Wofpakoota bands of the Dakota (or Sioux)
Nation of Indians.

The accompanying communication from the Secretary of War fully sets
forth the considerations which have called for the negotiation of this
treaty, and which have induced me to recommend its confirmation, with
such exceptions and modifications as the Senate may advise.

JOHN TYLER.



DEPARTMENT OF WAR, _August 31, 1841_.

The PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

SIR: I transmit herewith a treaty concluded with certain bands of
the Dahcota Nation of Indians, commonly called Sioux, which has been
received at this Department from His Excellency James D. Doty, governor
of Wisconsin, who was appointed a commissioner on the part of the United
States for the purpose of negotiating the treaty; and I desire to submit
the following facts and opinions inducing me to request its favorable
consideration:

It was known on my entering upon the duties of the Department of War
that some provision must speedily be made for the Winnebago Indians in
the Northwest. By the treaty with those Indians in 1837 it was provided
that they should move temporarily upon a narrow strip of country west of
the Mississippi River, called the neutral ground, from the object of its
purchase in 1830. That strip of country is only 40 miles in width, 20
miles of it having been purchased from the Sac and Fox Indians and 20
miles from the Sioux, the object of the purchase having been to place a
barrier between those tribes, which had been for many years at war and
parties of which were continually meeting and destroying each other upon
or adjacent to the country purchased.

When the delegation of Winnebago chiefs was in Washington negotiating
a sale of all their lands east of the Mississippi River, in 1837, a
permanent location for those Indians was not fixed upon, and a temporary
expedient was adopted, and acceded to by the Indians, by which they
agreed, within eight months from the ratification of the treaty, to move
upon and occupy a portion of the neutral ground until they should select
a permanent home.

Owing to the small extent of country thus temporarily assigned to the
Winnebagoes, utterly destitute of all preparation for the reception of
them, slenderly supplied with game, and, above all, the circumstance
that the Sac and Fox Indians were continually at war with the Sioux,
the object of the purchase having utterly failed, the neutral ground,
so called, proving literally the fighting ground of the hostile
tribes--owing to all these circumstances the Winnebagoes were extremely
reluctant to comply with the treaty. It was in part a dictate of
humanity to give them more time for removal than that allotted in the
treaty, in the hope of effecting their permanent removal beyond the
Missouri or elsewhere; but as no steps were taken to select their future
home, and as the white settlers in Wisconsin were fast crowding upon the
Indians, overrunning the country, as usual, in search of town sites,
water privileges, and farming districts, it became absolutely necessary
to make some efforts toward carrying the treaty into effect. Owing to
the excited state of the Indians and the apprehension of disturbance,
the Eighth Regiment of Infantry, in 1840, more than two years, instead
of eight months, after the ratification of the treaty, was ordered upon
the Winnebago frontier, the greater part of the Fifth Regiment being
already there, and in the presence of that force the Indians were
required to comply with the treaty. They reluctantly removed from the
banks of the Wisconsin River and crossed the Mississippi, but did not
go to that portion of the neutral ground agreed upon, which commenced
20 miles from the river, but instead of it they spread themselves along
the bank of the Mississippi, some of them recrossing that river and
ascending the Chippewa and Black rivers. Only a small portion of the
tribe has yet removed to the portion of the neutral ground assigned to
them, and it is perhaps fortunate that local attachments have not been
formed, since, from the position of the country, it was not and never
could have been intended as their permanent home.

After a careful examination of the country in the Northwest the
importance of providing for the Winnebago Indians, though immediate,
became secondary in a more national and wider prospect of benefits in
future years by arrangements which presented themselves to my mind as
not only practicable, but of easy accomplishment.

A glance at the map and at the efforts hitherto made in emigration will
show an extensive body of Indians accumulated upon the Southwestern
frontier, and, looking to the numbers yet to be emigrated from within
the circle of territory soon to become States of the American Union, it
will appear upon very many considerations to be of the utmost importance
to separate the Indians and to interpose a barrier between the masses
which are destined to be placed upon the western frontier, instead of
accumulating them within limits enabling them to unite and in concert
spread desolation over the States of Missouri and Arkansas to, perhaps,
the banks of the Mississippi.

Entertaining these views, it was determined to open negotiations with
the Sioux Indians north and northwest of the purchase of 1830, the
neutral ground, so called, with the purpose of purchasing sufficient
territory beyond the reasonable limits of Iowa to provide a resting
place for the Winnebagoes, intending to treat also with the Sac and Fox
Indians and with the Potawatamies north of the State of Missouri, and
thus enable our citizens to expand west of the Missouri River north of
the State.

It is difficult to state in a condensed report all the reasons now
imperatively urging the adoption of these measures. Besides the absolute
necessity of providing a home for the Winnebagoes, the citizens of Iowa
and of Missouri are crowding upon the territory of the Sac and Fox
Indians and already producing those irritations which in former times
have led to bloody wars. It is not to be for a moment concealed that our
enterprising and hardy population must and will occupy the territory
adjacent to that purchased in 1837 from the Sacs and Foxes, and the only
possible mode of its being done in peace is by another purchase from
those Indians. But the position of the Potawatamies will then become
relatively what that of the Sac and Fox Indians now is, with the
difference that access to their country by the Missouri River will
hasten its occupancy by our people. The only mode of guarding against
future collision, near at hand if not provided against, is by emigrating
not only the Sac and Fox Indians, but also the Potawatamies.

Great efforts have been made to induce those Indians, as also the
Winnebagoes, to move south of the Missouri, but without effect, their
opposition to it being apparently insurmountable, the Potawatamies
expressing the most decided aversion to it on being urged to join other
bands of Potawatamies on the Marais de Cygne, declaring that they would
rather at once go to California, being determined not to unite with
those bands, but to maintain an independence of them. By the purchase
from the Sioux no doubt is entertained that their prejudices may be
advantageously accommodated, for among the objects in contemplation
before adverted to it is to my mind of primary importance so to dispose
of those Indians as to enable this Government to interpose a State
between the Northern and Southern Indians along the Missouri River,
and thus, by dividing the Indians on the frontier and separating the
divisions, prevent a combination and concert of action which future
progress in civilization might otherwise enable them to effect in the
prosecution of revenge for real or imagined grievances.

Great importance is attached to this view of the subject, but scarcely
less to the means provided by the treaty for inducing the remnants of
other Northern tribes to remove to a climate congenial to their habits
and disposition.

From the earliest efforts at emigration certain Northern Indians have
strenuously objected to a removal south of the Missouri on account
of the climate; and where tribes have been induced to dispose of all
right to live east of the Mississippi within the United States, many
individuals, dreading their southern destination, have wandered to the
north and are now living in Canada, annually in the receipt of presents
from the British Government, and will be ready without doubt to side
with that power in any future conflict with this Government. In this
manner considerable numbers of the Delawares and Shawnees and other
Indians have disappeared from our settlements--a fact of great
importance, and which I apprehend has not been heretofore sufficiently
considered. There are many Potawatamies and Ottawas, as also Winnebagoes
and Menomonees, who may be easily induced to move into Canada by
seductive bribes, in the use of which the British Government has always
displayed a remarkable foresight.

Of the Chippewas and Ottawas now in the northern part of Michigan
it is believed there are over 5,000 under treaty obligations to remove
to the Southwest, the greater portion of whom openly declared their
determination to cross the line into Canada and put themselves under
the protection of the British Government in preference to a removal
to that country. These Indians may be accommodated by the arrangements
in contemplation, not only to their own satisfaction, but under
circumstances promising the greatest permanent advantages to the
United States, and separating them from all inducements and even the
possibility of entering the British service. I am not without hope,
also, that through this treaty some suitable and acceptable arrangement
may be made with the New York Indians by which they may be removed with
safety to themselves and benefit to the people of that State. The very
peculiar situation of these Indians is well known; that while they are
under treaty obligation to remove, the treaty being by the Constitution
the supreme law of the land and perfecting in this instance the title
of the land they occupy in a private land company, there is yet every
reason to sympathize with them and the highest moral inducements for
extending every possible relief to them within the legitimate powers of
the Government. I have been assured from sources entitled to my fullest
confidence that although these Indians have hitherto expressed the most
decided aversion to a removal south of the Missouri, there will probably
be no difficulty in persuading them to occupy a more northern region in
the West. I have every reason for believing that a benevolent interest
in their behalf among a portion of our own people, which, it is
supposed, has heretofore presented an obstacle to their emigration, will
be exerted to effect their removal if a portion of the Sioux country can
be appropriated to them.

It will be perceived, therefore, that a multitude of objects thus rest
upon the success of this one treaty, now submitted for examination and
approbation.

Of the Sioux Indians I will but remark that they occupy an immense
country spreading from the Mississippi north of the neutral ground west
and northwest, crossing the Missouri River more than 1,200 miles above
the city of St. Louis. They are divided into bands, which have various
names, the generic name for the whole being the Dahcota Nation. These
bands, though speaking a common language, are independent in their
occupancy of portions of country, and separate treaties may be made with
them. Treaties are already subsisting with some of the bands both on the
Mississippi and Missouri. The treaty now submitted is believed to be
advantageous, and from its provisions contemplates the reduction of
those wandering Indians from their nomadic habits to those of an
agricultural people.

If some of the provisions seem not such as might be desired, it will be
recollected that many interests have to be accommodated in framing an
Indian treaty which can only be fully known to the commissioner, who
derives his information directly from the Indians in the country which
is the object of the purchase.

It is proper to add that I had instructed the commissioner expressly not
to take into consideration what are called traders' claims, in the hope
of correcting a practice which, it is believed, has been attended with
mischievous consequences; but the commissioner has by a letter of
explanations fully satisfied me that in this instance it was absolutely
necessary to accommodate those claims as an indispensable means of
obtaining the assent of the Indians to the treaty. This results,
doubtless, from their dependence upon the traders for articles, in a
measure necessaries, which are for the most part furnished without
competition, and of the proper value of which the Indians are ignorant.

To compensate in some degree for the article in this treaty providing
for the payment of traders' claims, very judicious guards are introduced
into the treaty, calculated effectually to exclude that source of
interest adverse to the Government in all future time within the
purchase under this treaty.

There are other articles in the treaty which I have not been able fully
to realize as judicious or necessary, but for reasons already stated
they deserve respectful consideration.

Notwithstanding the article stipulating that a rejection of any of the
provisions of the treaty should render the whole null and void, I would
respectfully recommend such modified acceptance of the treaty as in the
wisdom of the Senate may seem just and proper, conditioned upon the
assent of the Indians subsequently to be obtained, the Senate making
provision for its reference back to the Indians if necessary.

It will be seen that the treaty provides for a power of regulation in
the Indian Territory by the United States Government under circumstances
not hitherto attempted, presenting an opportunity for an experiment well
worthy of mature consideration.

I ought not to dismiss this subject without adverting to one other
important consideration connected with the integrity of our Northwest
Indians and Territory. The Sioux treaty will effectually withdraw from
British influence all those who are a party to it by making them
stipendiaries of the United States and by operating a change in their
wandering habits and establishing them at known and fixed points under
the observation of Government agents, and as the British can only have
access to that region by the way of Fond du Lac, one or two small
military posts in a direction west and south from that point, it is
believed, will completely control all intercourse with the Indians in
that section of country.

Very respectfully, your obedient servant,

JNO. BELL.



WASHINGTON, _September 6, 1841_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I have the honor, in compliance with the resolution of the Senate of the
8th June, to communicate a letter[13] from the Secretary of the Treasury
and the correspondence accompanying it.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 13: Relating to the deposits of public moneys in banks by
disbursing officers and agents.]



WASHINGTON, _September 13, 1841_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In compliance with a resolution of the Senate of the 14th July last,
I communicate to the Senate a report from the Secretary of State,
accompanied by copies of the correspondence[14] called for by said
resolution.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 14: Relating to the origin, progress, and conclusion of the
treaty of November 26, 1838, between Sardinia and the United States.]




VETO MESSAGES.


WASHINGTON, _August 16, 1841_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

The bill entitled "An act to incorporate the subscribers to the Fiscal
Bank of the United States," which originated in the Senate, has been
considered by me with a sincere desire to conform my action in regard
to it to that of the two Houses of Congress. By the Constitution it
is made my duty either to approve the bill by signing it or to return
it with my objections to the House in which it originated. I can not
conscientiously give it my approval, and I proceed to discharge the duty
required of me by the Constitution--to give my reasons for disapproving.

The power of Congress to create a national bank to operate _per se_
over the Union has been a question of dispute from the origin of the
Government. Men most justly and deservedly esteemed for their high
intellectual endowments, their virtue, and their patriotism have in
regard to it entertained different and conflicting opinions; Congresses
have differed; the approval of one President has been followed by the
disapproval of another; the people at different times have acquiesced in
decisions both for and against. The country has been and still is deeply
agitated by this unsettled question. It will suffice for me to say that
my own opinion has been uniformly proclaimed to be against the exercise
of any such power by this Government. On all suitable occasions during
a period of twenty-five years the opinion thus entertained has been
unreservedly expressed. I declared it in the legislature of my native
State; in the House of Representatives of the United States it has been
openly vindicated by me; in the Senate Chamber, in the presence and
hearing of many who are at this time members of that body, it has been
affirmed and reaffirmed in speeches and reports there made and by votes
there recorded; in popular assemblies I have unhesitatingly announced
it, and the last public declaration which I made--and that but a short
time before the late Presidential election--I referred to my previously
expressed opinions as being those then entertained by me. With a full
knowledge of the opinions thus entertained and never concealed, I was
elected by the people Vice-President of the United States. By the
occurrence of a contingency provided for in the Constitution and arising
under an impressive dispensation of Providence I succeeded to the
Presidential office. Before entering upon the duties of that office
I took an oath that I would "preserve, protect, and defend the
Constitution of the United States." Entertaining the opinions alluded
to and having taken this oath, the Senate and the country will see that
I could not give my sanction to a measure of the character described
without surrendering all claim to the respect of honorable men, all
confidence on the part of the people, all self-respect, all regard for
moral and religious obligations, without an observance of which no
government can be prosperous and no people can be happy. It would be to
commit a crime which I would not willfully commit to gain any earthly
reward, and which would justly subject me to the ridicule and scorn of
all virtuous men.

I deem it entirely unnecessary at this time to enter upon the reasons
which have brought my mind to the convictions I feel and entertain on
this subject. They have been over and over again repeated. If some of
those who have preceded me in this high office have entertained and
avowed different opinions, I yield all confidence that their convictions
were sincere. I claim only to have the same measure meted out to myself.
Without going further into the argument, I will say that in looking to
the powers of this Government to collect, safely keep, and disburse the
public revenue, and incidentally to regulate the commerce and exchanges,
I have not been able to satisfy myself that the establishment by this
Government of a bank of discount in the ordinary acceptation of that
term was a necessary means or one demanded by propriety to execute those
powers. What can the local discounts of the bank have to do with the
collecting, safe-keeping, and disbursing of the revenue? So far as the
mere discounting of paper is concerned, it is quite immaterial to this
question whether the discount is obtained at a State bank or a United
States bank. They are both equally local, both beginning and both ending
in a local accommodation. What influence have local discounts granted by
any form of bank in the regulating of the currency and the exchanges?
Let the history of the late United States Bank aid us in answering this
inquiry.

For several years after the establishment of that institution it dealt
almost exclusively in local discounts, and during that period the
country was for the most part disappointed in the consequences
anticipated from its incorporation. A uniform currency was not provided,
exchanges were not regulated, and little or nothing was added to the
general circulation, and in 1820 its embarrassments had become so great
that the directors petitioned Congress to repeal that article of the
charter which made its notes receivable everywhere in payment of the
public dues. It had up to that period dealt to but a very small extent
in exchanges, either foreign or domestic, and as late as 1823 its
operations in that line amounted to a little more than $7,000,000 per
annum. A very rapid augmentation soon after occurred, and in 1833 its
dealings in the exchanges amounted to upward of $100,000,000, including
the sales of its own drafts; and all these immense transactions were
effected without the employment of extraordinary means. The currency of
the country became sound, and the negotiations in the exchanges were
carried on at the lowest possible rates. The circulation was increased
to more than $22,000,000 and the notes of the bank were regarded as
equal to specie all over the country, thus showing almost conclusively
that it was the capacity to deal in exchanges, and not in local
discounts, which furnished these facilities and advantages. It may be
remarked, too, that notwithstanding the immense transactions of the bank
in the purchase of exchange, the losses sustained were merely nominal,
while in the line of discounts the suspended debt was enormous and
proved most disastrous to the bank and the country. Its power of local
discount has in fact proved to be a fruitful source of favoritism and
corruption, alike destructive to the public morals and to the general
weal.

The capital invested in banks of discount in the United States, created
by the States, at this time exceeds $350,000,000, and if the discounting
of local paper could have produced any beneficial effects the United
States ought to possess the soundest currency in the world; but the
reverse is lamentably the fact.

Is the measure now under consideration of the objectionable character
to which I have alluded? It is clearly so unless by the sixteenth
fundamental article of the eleventh section it is made otherwise. That
article is in the following words:

  The directors of the said corporation shall establish one competent
  office of discount and deposit in any State in which two thousand shares
  shall have been subscribed or may be held, whenever, upon application of
  the legislature of such State, Congress may by law require the same. And
  the said directors may also establish one or more competent offices of
  discount and deposit in any Territory or District of the United States,
  and in any State with the assent of such State, and when established the
  said office or offices shall be only withdrawn or removed by the said
  directors prior to the expiration of this charter with the previous
  assent of Congress: _Provided_, In respect to any State which shall not,
  at the first session of the legislature thereof held after the passage
  of this act, by resolution or other usual legislative proceeding,
  unconditionally assent or dissent to the establishment of such office
  or offices within it, such assent of the said State shall be thereafter
  presumed: _And provided, nevertheless_, That whenever it shall become
  necessary and proper for carrying into execution any of the powers
  granted by the Constitution to establish an office or offices in any of
  the States whatever, and the establishment thereof shall be directed by
  law, it shall be the duty of the said directors to establish such office
  or offices accordingly.

It will be seen that by this clause the directors are invested with the
fullest power to establish a branch in any State which has yielded its
assent; and having once established such branch, it shall not afterwards
be withdrawn except by order of Congress. Such assent is to be _implied_
and to have the force and sanction of an actually expressed assent,
"provided, in respect to any State which shall not, at _the first
session_ of the legislature thereof held after the passage of this act,
by _resolution_ or _other usual legislative proceeding, unconditionally_
assent or dissent to the establishment of such office or offices within
it, such assent of said State shall be thereafter presumed." The assent
or dissent is to be expressed _unconditionally at the first session of
the legislature, by some formal legislative act;_ and if not so
expressed its assent is to be _implied_, and the directors are thereupon
invested with power, at such time thereafter as they may please, to
establish branches, which can not afterwards be withdrawn except by
resolve of Congress. No matter what may be the cause which may operate
with the legislature, which either prevents it from speaking or
addresses itself to its wisdom, to induce delay, its assent is to be
implied. This iron rule is to give way to no circumstances; it is
unbending and inflexible. It is the language of the master to the
vassal; an unconditional answer is claimed forthwith, and delay,
postponement, or incapacity to answer produces an implied assent which
is ever after irrevocable. Many of the State elections have already
taken place without any knowledge on the part of the people that such a
question was to come up. The representatives may desire a submission of
the question to their constituents preparatory to final action upon it,
but this high privilege is denied; whatever may be the motives and views
entertained by the representatives of the people to induce delay, their
assent is to be presumed, and is ever afterwards binding unless their
dissent shall be unconditionally expressed at their first session after
the passage of this bill into a law. They may by formal resolution
declare the question of assent or dissent to be undecided and postponed,
and yet, in opposition to their express declaration to the contrary,
their assent is to be implied. Cases innumerable might be cited to
manifest the irrationality of such an inference. Let one or two in
addition suffice. The popular branch of the legislature may express its
dissent by an unanimous vote, and its resolution may be defeated by
a tie vote of the senate, and yet the assent is to be implied. Both
branches of the legislature may concur in a resolution of decided
dissent, and yet the governor may exert the _veto_ power conferred on
him by the State constitution, and their legislative action be defeated,
and yet the assent of the legislative authority is implied, and the
directors of this contemplated institution are authorized to establish a
branch or branches in such State whenever they may find it conducive to
the interest of the stockholders to do so; and having once established
it they can under no circumstances withdraw it except by act of
Congress. The State may afterwards protest against such unjust
inference, but its authority is gone. Its assent is implied by its
failure or inability to act at its first session, and its voice can
never afterwards be heard. To inferences so violent and, as they seem to
me, irrational I can not yield my consent. No court of justice would
or could sanction them without reversing all that is established in
judicial proceeding by introducing presumptions at variance with fact
and inferences at the expense of reason. A State in a condition of
duress would be _presumed_ to speak as an individual manacled and in
prison might be presumed to be in the enjoyment of freedom. Far better
to say to the States boldly and frankly, Congress wills and submission
is demanded.

It may be said that the directors may not establish branches under such
circumstances; but this is a question of power, and this bill invests
them with full authority to do so. If the legislature of New York or
Pennsylvania or any other State should be found to be in such condition
as I have supposed, could there be any security furnished against such a
step on the part of the directors? Nay, is it not fairly to be presumed
that this proviso was introduced for the sole purpose of meeting the
contingency referred to? Why else should it have been introduced? And
I submit to the Senate whether it can be believed that any State would
be likely to sit quietly down under such a state of things. In a great
measure of public interest their patriotism may be successfully appealed
to, but to infer their assent from circumstances at war with such
inference I can not but regard as calculated to excite a feeling at
fatal enmity with the peace and harmony of the country. I must therefore
regard this clause as asserting the power to be in Congress to establish
offices of discount in a State not only without its assent, but against
its dissent, and so regarding it I can not sanction it. On general
principles the right in Congress to prescribe terms to any State implies
a superiority of power and control, deprives the transaction of all
pretense to compact between them, and terminates, as we have seen, in
the total abrogation of freedom of action on the part of the States.
But, further, the State may express, after the most solemn form of
legislation, its dissent, which may from time to time thereafter be
repeated in full view of its own interest, which can never be separated
from the wise and beneficent operation of this Government, and yet
Congress may by virtue of the last proviso overrule its law, and upon
grounds which to such State will appear to rest on a constructive
necessity and propriety and nothing more. I regard the bill as asserting
for Congress the right to incorporate a United States bank with power
and right to establish offices of discount and deposit in the several
States of this Union with or without their consent--a principle to which
I have always heretofore been opposed and which can never obtain my
sanction; and waiving all other considerations growing out of its other
provisions, I return it to the House in which it originated with these
my objections to its approval.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _September 9, 1841_.

_To the House of Representatives of the United States_:

It is with extreme regret that I feel myself constrained by the duty
faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States
and to the best of my ability to "preserve, protect, and defend the
Constitution of the United States" to return to the House in which it
originated the bill "to provide for the better collection, safe-keeping,
and disbursement of the public revenue by means of a corporation to be
styled the Fiscal Corporation of the United States," with my written
objections.

In my message sent to the Senate on the 16th day of August last,
returning the bill "to incorporate the subscribers to the Fiscal Bank
of the United States," I distinctly declared that my own opinion had
been uniformly proclaimed to be against the exercise "of the power of
Congress to create a national bank to operate _per se_ over the Union,"
and, entertaining that opinion, my main objection to that bill was based
upon the highest moral and religious obligations of conscience and the
Constitution. I readily admit that whilst the qualified _veto_ with
which the Chief Magistrate is invested should be regarded and was
intended by the wise men who made it a part of the Constitution as a
great conservative principle of our system, without the exercise of
which on important occasions a mere representative majority might urge
the Government in its legislation beyond the limits fixed by its framers
or might exert its just powers too hastily or oppressively, yet it is
a power which ought to be most cautiously exerted, and perhaps never
except in a case eminently involving the public interest or one in which
the oath of the President, acting under his convictions, both mental
and moral, imperiously requires its exercise. In such a case he has no
alternative. He must either exert the negative power intrusted to him
by the Constitution chiefly for its own preservation, protection, and
defense or commit an act of gross moral turpitude. Mere regard to the
will of a majority must not in a constitutional republic like ours
control this sacred and solemn duty of a sworn officer. The Constitution
itself I regard and cherish as the embodied and written will of the
whole people of the United States. It is their fixed and fundamental
law, which they unanimously prescribe to the public functionaries, their
mere trustees and servants. This _their_ will and the law which _they_
have given us as the rule of our action have no guard, no guaranty of
preservation, protection, and defense, but the oaths which it prescribes
to the public officers, the sanctity with which they shall religiously
observe those oaths, and the patriotism with which the people shall
shield it by their own sovereign will, which has made the Constitution
supreme. It must be exerted against the will of a mere representative
majority or not at all. It is alone in pursuance of that will that any
measure can reach the President, and to say that because a majority
in Congress have passed a bill he should therefore sanction it is
to abrogate the power altogether and to render its insertion in the
Constitution a work of absolute supererogation. The duty is to guard the
fundamental will of the people themselves from (in this case; I admit,
unintentional) change or infraction by a majority in Congress; and in
that light alone do I regard the constitutional duty which I now most
reluctantly discharge. Is this bill now presented for my approval or
disapproval such a bill as I have already declared could not receive my
sanction? Is it such a bill as calls for the exercise of the negative
power under the Constitution? Does it violate the Constitution by
creating a national bank to operate _per se_ over the Union? Its title,
in the first place, describes its general character. It is "an act to
provide for the better collection, safe-keeping, and disbursement of the
_public_ revenue by means of a _corporation_ to be styled the _Fiscal
Corporation_ of the _United States_." In style, then, it is plainly
national in its character. Its powers, functions, and duties are those
which pertain to the _collecting, keeping_, and _disbursing_ the
_public_ revenue. The means by which these are to be exerted is a
_corporation_ to be styled the _Fiscal_ Corporation of the United
States. It is a corporation created by the Congress of the United
States, in its character of a national legislature for the whole
Union, to perform the _fiscal_ purposes, meet the _fiscal_ wants and
exigencies, supply the _fiscal_ uses, and exert the _fiscal_ agencies
of the Treasury of the United States. Such is its own description of
itself. Do its provisions contradict its title? They do not. It is true
that by its first section it provides that it shall be established in
the District of Columbia; but the amount of its capital, the manner
in which its stock is to be subscribed for and held, the persons and
bodies, corporate and politic, by whom its stock may be held, the
appointment of its directors and their powers and duties, its
fundamental articles, especially that to establish agencies in any part
of the Union, the corporate powers and business of such agencies, the
prohibition of Congress to establish any other corporation with similar
powers for twenty years, with express reservation in the same clause
to modify or create any bank for the District of Columbia, so that the
aggregate capital shall not exceed five millions, without enumerating
other features which are equally distinctive and characteristic, clearly
show that it can not be regarded as other than a bank of the United
States, with powers seemingly more limited than have heretofore been
granted to such an institution. It operates _per se_ over the Union by
virtue of the unaided and, in my view, assumed authority of Congress
as a national legislature, as distinguishable from a bank created by
Congress for the District of Columbia as the local legislature of the
District. Every United States bank heretofore created has had power to
deal in bills of exchange as well as local discounts. Both were trading
privileges conferred, and both were exercised by virtue of the aforesaid
power of Congress over the whole Union. The question of power remains
unchanged without reference to the extent of privilege granted. If this
proposed corporation is to be regarded as a local bank of the District
of Columbia, invested by Congress with general powers to operate over
the Union, it is obnoxious to still stronger objections. It assumes that
Congress may invest a local institution with general or national powers.
With the same propriety that it may do this in regard to a bank of the
District of Columbia it may as to a State bank. Yet who can indulge the
idea that this Government can rightfully, by making a State bank its
fiscal agent, invest it with the absolute and unqualified powers
conferred by this bill? When I come to look at the details of the bill,
they do not recommend it strongly to my adoption. A brief notice of some
of its provisions will suffice.

First. It may justify substantially a system of discounts of the most
objectionable character. It is to deal in bills of exchange drawn in one
State and payable in another without any restraint. The bill of exchange
may have an unlimited time to run, and its renewability is nowhere
guarded against. It may, in fact, assume the most objectionable form of
accommodation paper. It is not required to rest on any actual, real, or
substantial exchange basis. A drawer in one place becomes the accepter
in another, and so in turn the accepter may become the drawer upon a
mutual understanding. It may at the same time indulge in mere local
discounts under the name of bills of exchange. A bill drawn at
Philadelphia on Camden, N.J., at New York on a border town in New
Jersey, at Cincinnati on Newport, in Kentucky, not to multiply other
examples, might, for anything in this bill to restrain it, become a mere
matter of local accommodation. Cities thus relatively situated would
possess advantages over cities otherwise situated of so decided a
character as most justly to excite dissatisfaction.

Second. There is no limit prescribed to the premium in the purchase
of bills of exchange, thereby correcting none of the evils under which
the community now labors, and operating most injuriously upon the
agricultural States, in which the irregularities in the rates of
exchange are most severely felt. Nor are these the only consequences.
A resumption of specie payments by the banks of those States would be
liable to indefinite postponement; for as the operation of the agencies
of the interior would chiefly consist in selling bills of exchange, and
the purchases could only be made in specie or the notes of banks paying
specie, the State banks would either have to continue with their doors
closed or exist at the mercy of this national monopoly of brokerage.
Nor can it be passed over without remark that whilst the District of
Columbia is made the seat of the principal bank, its citizens are
excluded from all participation in any benefit it might afford by
a positive prohibition on the bank from all discounting within the
District.

These are some of the objections which prominently exist against the
details of the bill. Others might be urged of much force, but it would
be unprofitable to dwell upon them. Suffice it to add that this charter
is designed to continue for twenty years without a competitor; that the
defects to which I have alluded, being founded on the fundamental law of
the corporation, are irrevocable, and that if the objections be well
founded it would be overhazardous to pass the bill into a law.

In conclusion I take leave most respectfully to say that I have felt the
most anxious solicitude to meet the wishes of Congress in the adoption
of a fiscal agent which, avoiding all constitutional objections, should
harmonize conflicting opinions. Actuated by this feeling, I have been
ready to yield much in a spirit of conciliation to the opinions of
others; and it is with great pain that I now feel compelled to differ
from Congress a second time in the same session. At the commencement of
this session, inclined from choice to defer to the legislative will, I
submitted to Congress the propriety of adopting a fiscal agent which,
without violating the Constitution, would separate the public money from
the Executive control and perform the operations of the Treasury without
being burdensome to the people or inconvenient or expensive to the
Government. It is deeply to be regretted that this department of the
Government can not upon constitutional and other grounds concur with the
legislative department in this last measure proposed to attain these
desirable objects. Owing to the brief space between the period of the
death of my lamented predecessor and my own installation into office,
I was, in fact, not left time to prepare and submit a definitive
recommendation of my own in my regular message, and since my mind has
been wholly occupied in a most anxious attempt to conform my action
to the legislative will. In this communication I am confined by the
Constitution to my objections simply to this bill, but the period of the
regular session will soon arrive, when it will be my duty, under another
clause of the Constitution, "to give to Congress information of the
state of the Union and recommend to their consideration such measures
as" I "shall judge necessary and expedient." And I most respectfully
submit, in a spirit of harmony, whether the present differences of
opinion should be pressed further at this time, and whether the
peculiarity of my situation does not entitle me to a postponement of
this subject to a more auspicious period for deliberation. The two
Houses of Congress have distinguished themselves at this extraordinary
session by the performance of an immense mass of labor at a season very
unfavorable both to health and action, and have passed many laws which
I trust will prove highly beneficial to the interests of the country
and fully answer its just expectations. It has been my good fortune
and pleasure to concur with them in all measures except this. And why
should our difference on this alone be pushed to extremes? It is my
anxious desire that it should not be. I too have been burdened with
extraordinary labors of late, and I sincerely desire time for deep
and deliberate reflection on this the greatest difficulty of my
Administration. May we not now pause until a more favorable time, when,
with the most anxious hope that the Executive and Congress may cordially
unite, some measure of finance may be deliberately adopted promotive of
the good of our common country?

I will take this occasion to declare that the conclusions to which
I have brought myself are those of a settled conviction, founded, in
my opinion, on a just view of the Constitution; that in arriving at it
I have been actuated by no other motive or desire than to uphold the
institutions of the country as they have come down to us from the hands
of our godlike ancestors, and that I shall esteem my efforts to sustain
them, even though I perish, more honorable than to win the applause of
men by a sacrifice of my duty and my conscience.

JOHN TYLER.




PROCLAMATION.


[From Statutes at Large (Little, Brown & Co.), Vol. XI, p. 786.]


BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

A PROCLAMATION.

Whereas it has come to the knowledge of the Government of the United
States that sundry secret lodges, clubs, or associations exist on the
northern frontier; that the members of these lodges are bound together
by secret oaths; that they have collected firearms and other military
materials and secreted them in sundry places; and that it is their
purpose to violate the laws of their country by making military and
lawless incursions, when opportunity shall offer, into the territories
of a power with which the United States are at peace; and

Whereas it is known that traveling agitators, from both sides of the
line, visit these lodges and harangue the members in secret meeting,
stimulating them to illegal acts; and

Whereas the same persons are known to levy contributions on the ignorant
and credulous for their own benefit, thus supporting and enriching
themselves by the basest means; and

Whereas the unlawful intentions of the members of these lodges have
already been manifested in an attempt to destroy the lives and property
of the inhabitants of Chippewa, in Canada, and the public property of
the British Government there being:

Now, therefore, I, John Tyler, President of the United States, do issue
this my proclamation, admonishing all such evil-minded persons of the
condign punishment which is certain to overtake them; assuring them that
the laws of the United States will be rigorously executed against their
illegal acts, and that if in any lawless incursion into Canada they fall
into the hands of the British authorities they will not be reclaimed as
American citizens nor any interference made by this Government in their
behalf. And I exhort all well-meaning but deluded persons who may have
joined these lodges immediately to abandon them and to have nothing more
to do with their secret meetings or unlawful oaths, as they would avoid
serious consequences to themselves. And I expect the intelligent and
well-disposed members of the community to frown on all these unlawful
combinations and illegal proceedings, and to assist the Government in
maintaining the peace of the country against the mischievous
consequences of the acts of these violators of the law.

Given under my hand, at the city of Washington, the 25th day of
September, A.D. 1841, and of the Independence of the United States the
sixty-sixth.

[SEAL.]

JOHN TYLER.

By the President:
  DANIEL WEBSTER,
    _Secretary of State_.




EXECUTIVE ORDER.


GENERAL ORDERS.


WAR DEPARTMENT,

ADJUTANT-GENERAL'S OFFICE,

_Washington, July 5, 1841_.

Brevet Major-General Winfield Scott having been appointed by the
President, by and with the consent and advice of the Senate, the
Major-general of the Army of the United States, he is directed to assume
the command and enter upon his duties accordingly.

By command of the President of the United States:

R. JONES,
  _Adjutant-General_.




FIRST ANNUAL MESSAGE.


WASHINGTON, _December 7, 1841_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States_:

In coming together, fellow-citizens, to enter again upon the discharge
of the duties with which the people have charged us severally, we find
great occasion to rejoice in the general prosperity of the country.
We are in the enjoyment of all the blessings of civil and religious
liberty, with unexampled means of education, knowledge, and improvement.
Through the year which is now drawing to a close peace has been in our
borders and plenty in our habitations, and although disease has visited
some few portions of the land with distress and mortality, yet in
general the health of the people has been preserved, and we are all
called upon by the highest obligations of duty to renew our thanks and
our devotion to our Heavenly Parent, who has continued to vouchsafe to
us the eminent blessings which surround us and who has so signally
crowned the year with His goodness. If we find ourselves increasing
beyond example in numbers, in strength, in wealth, in knowledge, in
everything which promotes human and social happiness, let us ever
remember our dependence for all these on the protection and merciful
dispensations of Divine Providence.

Since your last adjournment Alexander McLeod, a British subject who was
indicted for the murder of an American citizen, and whose case has been
the subject of a correspondence heretofore communicated to you, has been
acquitted by the verdict of an impartial and intelligent jury, and has
under the judgment of the court been regularly discharged.

Great Britain having made known to this Government that the expedition
which was fitted out from Canada for the destruction of the steamboat
_Caroline_ in the winter of 1837, and which resulted in the destruction
of said boat and in the death of an American citizen, was undertaken
by orders emanating from the authorities of the British Government in
Canada, and demanding the discharge of McLeod upon the ground that
if engaged in that expedition he did but fulfill the orders of his
Government, has thus been answered in the only way in which she could be
answered by a government the powers of which are distributed among its
several departments by the fundamental law. Happily for the people of
Great Britain, as well as those of the United States, the only mode by
which an individual arraigned for a criminal offense before the courts
of either can obtain his discharge is by the independent action of the
judiciary and by proceedings equally familiar to the courts of both
countries.

If in Great Britain a power exists in the Crown to cause to be entered a
_nolle prosequi_, which is not the case with the Executive power of the
United States upon a prosecution pending in a State court, yet _there_
no more than _here_ can the chief executive power rescue a prisoner from
custody without an order of the proper tribunal directing his discharge.
The precise stage of the proceedings at which such order may be made is
a matter of municipal regulation exclusively, and not to be complained
of by any other government. In cases of this kind a government becomes
politically responsible only when its tribunals of last resort are shown
to have rendered unjust and injurious judgments in matters not doubtful.
To the establishment and elucidation of this principle no nation has
lent its authority more efficiently than Great Britain. Alexander
McLeod, having his option either to prosecute a writ of error from the
decision of the supreme court of New York, which had been rendered upon
his application for a discharge, to the Supreme Court of the United
States, or to submit his case to the decision of a jury, preferred the
latter, deeming it the readiest mode of obtaining his liberation; and
the result has fully sustained the wisdom of his choice. The manner in
which the issue submitted was tried will satisfy the English Government
that the principles of justice will never fail to govern the enlightened
decision of an American tribunal. I can not fail, however, to suggest to
Congress the propriety, and in some degree the necessity, of making such
provisions by law, so far as they may constitutionally do so, for the
removal at their commencement and at the option of the party of all
such cases as may hereafter arise, and which may involve the faithful
observance and execution of our international obligations, from the
State to the Federal judiciary. This Government, by our institutions, is
charged with the maintenance of peace and the preservation of amicable
relations with the nations of the earth, and ought to possess without
question all the reasonable and proper means of maintaining the one and
preserving the other. While just confidence is felt in the judiciary of
the States, yet this Government ought to be competent in itself for the
fulfillment of the high duties which have been devolved upon it under
the organic law by the States themselves.

In the month of September a party of armed men from Upper Canada invaded
the territory of the United States and forcibly seized upon the person
of one Grogan, and under circumstances of great harshness hurriedly
carried him beyond the limits of the United States and delivered him up
to the authorities of Upper Canada. His immediate discharge was ordered
by those authorities upon the facts of the case being brought to their
knowledge--a course of procedure which was to have been expected from
a nation with whom we are at peace, and which was not more due to the
rights of the United States than to its own regard for justice. The
correspondence which passed between the Department of State and the
British envoy, Mr. Fox, and with the governor of Vermont, as soon as the
facts had been made known to this department, are herewith communicated.

I regret that it is not in my power to make known to you an equally
satisfactory conclusion in the case of the _Caroline_ steamer, with the
circumstances connected with the destruction of which, in December,
1837, by an armed force fitted out in the Province of Upper Canada, you
are already made acquainted. No such atonement as was due for the public
wrong done to the United States by this invasion of her territory, so
wholly irreconcilable with her rights as an independent power, has yet
been made. In the view taken by this Government the inquiry whether
the vessel was in the employment of those who were prosecuting an
unauthorized war against that Province or was engaged by the owner in
the business of transporting passengers to and from Navy Island in hopes
of private gain, which was most probably the case, in no degree alters
the real question at issue between the two Governments. This Government
can never concede to any foreign government the power, except in a case
of the most urgent and extreme necessity, of invading its territory,
either to arrest the persons or destroy the property of those who may
have violated the municipal laws of such foreign government or have
disregarded their obligations arising under the law of nations. The
territory of the United States must be regarded as sacredly secure
against all such invasions until they shall voluntarily acknowledge
their inability to acquit themselves of their duties to others. And in
announcing this sentiment I do but affirm a principle which no nation on
earth would be more ready to vindicate at all hazards than the people
and Government of Great Britain. If upon a full investigation of all the
facts it shall appear that the owner of the _Caroline_ was governed by
a hostile intent or had made common cause with those who were in the
occupancy of Navy Island, then so far as he is concerned there can be no
claim to indemnity for the destruction of his boat which this Government
would feel itself bound to prosecute, since he would have acted not only
in derogation of the rights of Great Britain, but in clear violation of
the laws of the United States; but that is a question which, however
settled, in no manner involves the higher consideration of the violation
of territorial sovereignty and jurisdiction. To recognize it as an
admissible practice that each Government in its turn, upon any sudden
and unauthorized outbreak which, on a frontier the extent of which
renders it impossible for either to have an efficient force on every
mile of it, and which outbreak, therefore, neither may be able to
suppress in a day, may take vengeance into its own hands, and without
even a remonstrance, and in the absence of any pressing or overruling
necessity may invade the territory of the other, would inevitably lead
to results equally to be deplored by both. When border collisions come
to receive the sanction or to be made on the authority of either
Government general war must be the inevitable result. While it is the
ardent desire of the United States to cultivate the relations of peace
with all nations and to fulfill all the duties of good neighborhood
toward those who possess territories adjoining their own, that very
desire would lead them to deny the right of any foreign power to invade
their boundary with an armed force. The correspondence between the two
Governments on this subject will at a future day of your session be
submitted to your consideration; and in the meantime I can not but
indulge the hope that the British Government will see the propriety of
renouncing as a rule of future action the precedent which has been set
in the affair at Schlosser.

I herewith submit the correspondence which has recently taken place
between the American minister at the Court of St. James, Mr. Stevenson,
and the minister of foreign affairs of that Government on the right
claimed by that Government to visit and detain vessels sailing under
the American flag and engaged in prosecuting lawful commerce in the
African seas. Our commercial interests in that region have experienced
considerable increase and have become an object of much importance, and
it is the duty of this Government to protect them against all improper
and vexatious interruption. However desirous the United States may
be for the suppression of the slave trade, they can not consent to
interpolations into the maritime code at the mere will and pleasure of
other governments. We deny the right of any such interpolation to any
one or all the nations of the earth without our consent. We claim to
have a voice in all amendments or alterations of that code, and when we
are given to understand, as in this instance, by a foreign government
that its treaties with other nations can not be executed without the
establishment and enforcement of new principles of maritime police, to
be applied without our consent, we must employ a language neither of
equivocal import or susceptible of misconstruction. American citizens
prosecuting a lawful commerce in the African seas under the flag of
their country are not responsible for the abuse or unlawful use of that
flag by others; nor can they rightfully on account of any such alleged
abuses be interrupted, molested, or detained while on the ocean, and if
thus molested and detained while pursuing honest voyages in the usual
way and violating no law themselves they are unquestionably entitled to
indemnity. This Government has manifested its repugnance to the slave
trade in a manner which can not be misunderstood. By its fundamental law
it prescribed limits in point of time to its continuance, and against
its own citizens who might so far forget the rights of humanity as to
engage in that wicked traffic it has long since by its municipal laws
denounced the most condign punishment. Many of the States composing this
Union had made appeals to the civilized world for its suppression long
before the moral sense of other nations had become shocked by the
iniquities of the traffic. Whether this Government should now enter into
treaties containing mutual stipulations upon this subject is a question
for its mature deliberation. Certain it is that if the right to detain
American ships on the high seas can be justified on the plea of a
necessity for such detention arising out of the existence of treaties
between other nations, the same plea may be extended and enlarged by the
new stipulations of new treaties to which the United States may not be a
party. This Government will not cease to urge upon that of Great Britain
full and ample remuneration for all losses, whether arising from
detention or otherwise, to which American citizens have heretofore been
or may hereafter be subjected by the exercise of rights which this
Government can not recognize as legitimate and proper. Nor will I
indulge a doubt but that the sense of justice of Great Britain will
constrain her to make retribution for any wrong or loss which any
American citizen engaged in the prosecution of lawful commerce may have
experienced at the hands of her cruisers or other public authorities.
This Government, at the same time, will relax no effort to prevent its
citizens, if there be any so disposed, from prosecuting a traffic so
revolting to the feelings of humanity. It seeks to do no more than to
protect the fair and honest trader from molestation and injury; but
while the enterprising mariner engaged in the pursuit of an honorable
trade is entitled to its protection, it will visit with condign
punishment others of an opposite character.

I invite your attention to existing laws for the suppression of the
African slave trade, and recommend all such alterations as may give
to them greater force and efficacy. That the American flag is grossly
abused by the abandoned and profligate of other nations is but too
probable. Congress has not long since had this subject under its
consideration, and its importance well justifies renewed and anxious
attention.

I also communicate herewith the copy of a correspondence between Mr.
Stevenson and Lord Palmerston upon the subject, so interesting to
several of the Southern States, of the rice duties, which resulted
honorably to the justice of Great Britain and advantageously to the
United States.

At the opening of the last annual session the President informed
Congress of the progress which had then been made in negotiating a
convention between this Government and that of England with a view
to the final settlement of the question of the boundary between the
territorial limits of the two countries. I regret to say that little
further advancement of the object has been accomplished since last year,
but this is owing to circumstances no way indicative of any abatement of
the desire of both parties to hasten the negotiation to its conclusion
and to settle the question in dispute as early as possible. In the
course of the session it is my hope to be able to announce some further
degree of progress toward the accomplishment of this highly desirable
end.

The commission appointed by this Government for the exploration and
survey of the line of boundary separating the States of Maine and New
Hampshire from the conterminous British Provinces is, it is believed,
about to close its field labors and is expected soon to report the
results of its examinations to the Department of State. The report,
when received, will be laid before Congress.

The failure on the part of Spain to pay with punctuality the interest
due under the convention of 1834 for the settlement of claims between
the two countries has made it the duty of the Executive to call the
particular attention of that Government to the subject. A disposition
has been manifested by it, which is believed to be entirely sincere,
to fulfill its obligations in this respect so soon as its internal
condition and the state of its finances will permit. An arrangement is
in progress from the result of which it is trusted that those of our
citizens who have claims under the convention will at no distant day
receive the stipulated payments.

A treaty of commerce and navigation with Belgium was concluded and
signed at Washington on the 29th of March, 1840, and was duly sanctioned
by the Senate of the United States. The treaty was ratified by His
Belgian Majesty, but did not receive the approbation of the Belgian
Chambers within the time limited by its terms, and has therefore become
void.

This occurrence assumes the graver aspect from the consideration that in
1833 a treaty negotiated between the two Governments and ratified on the
part of the United States failed to be ratified on the part of Belgium.
The representative of that Government at Washington informs the
Department of State that he has been instructed to give explanations of
the causes which occasioned delay in the approval of the late treaty by
the legislature, and to express the regret of the King at the
occurrence.

The joint commission under the convention with Texas to ascertain the
true boundary between the two countries has concluded its labors, but
the final report of the commissioner of the United States has not been
received. It is understood, however, that the meridian line as traced
by the commission lies somewhat farther east than the position hitherto
generally assigned to it, and consequently includes in Texas some part
of the territory which had been considered as belonging to the States
of Louisiana and Arkansas.

The United States can not but take a deep interest in whatever relates
to this young but growing Republic. Settled principally by emigrants
from the United States, we have the happiness to know that the great
principles of civil liberty are there destined to flourish under wise
institutions and wholesome laws, and that through its example another
evidence is to be afforded of the capacity of popular institutions to
advance the prosperity, happiness, and permanent glory of the human
race. The great truth that government was made for the people and not
the people for government has already been established in the practice
and by the example of these United States, and we can do no other than
contemplate its further exemplification by a sister republic with the
deepest interest.

Our relations with the independent States of this hemisphere, formerly
under the dominion of Spain, have not undergone any material change
within the past year. The incessant sanguinary conflicts in or between
those countries are to be greatly deplored as necessarily tending to
disable them from performing their duty as members of the community
of nations and rising to the destiny which the position and natural
resources of many of them might lead them justly to anticipate, as
constantly giving occasion also, directly or indirectly, for complaints
on the part of our citizens who resort thither for purposes of
commercial intercourse, and as retarding reparation for wrongs already
committed, some of which are by no means of recent date.

The failure of the Congress of Ecuador to hold a session at the time
appointed for that purpose, in January last, will probably render
abortive a treaty of commerce with that Republic, which was signed at
Quito on the 13th of June, 1839, and had been duly ratified on our
part, but which required the approbation of that body prior to its
ratification by the Ecuadorian Executive.

A convention which has been concluded with the Republic of Peru,
providing for the settlement of certain claims of citizens of the United
States upon the Government of that Republic, will be duly submitted to
the Senate.

The claims of our citizens against the Brazilian Government originating
from captures and other causes are still unsatisfied. The United States
have, however, so uniformly shown a disposition to cultivate relations
of amity with that Empire that it is hoped the unequivocal tokens of the
same spirit toward us which an adjustment of the affairs referred to
would afford will be given without further avoidable delay.

The war with the Indian tribes on the peninsula of Florida has during
the last summer and fall been prosecuted with untiring activity and
zeal. A summer campaign was resolved upon as the best mode of bringing
it to a close. Our brave officers and men who have been engaged in that
service have suffered toils and privations and exhibited an energy which
in any other war would have won for them unfading laurels. In despite
of the sickness incident to the climate, they have penetrated the
fastnesses of the Indians, broken up their encampments, and harassed
them unceasingly. Numbers have been captured, and still greater numbers
have surrendered and have been transported to join their brethren on the
lands elsewhere allotted to them by the Government, and a strong hope is
entertained that under the conduct of the gallant officer at the head of
the troops in Florida that troublesome and expensive war is destined to
a speedy termination. With all the other Indian tribes we are enjoying
the blessings of peace. Our duty as well as our best interests prompts
us to observe in all our intercourse with them fidelity in fulfilling
our engagements, the practice of strict justice, as well as the constant
exercise of acts of benevolence and kindness. These are the great
instruments of civilization, and through the use of them alone can the
untutored child of the forest be induced to listen to its teachings.

The Secretary of State, on whom the acts of Congress have devolved the
duty of directing the proceedings for the taking of the sixth census or
enumeration of the inhabitants of the United States, will report to the
two Houses the progress of that work. The enumeration of persons has
been completed, and exhibits a grand total of 17,069,453, making an
increase over the census of 1830 of 4,202,646 inhabitants, and showing
a gain in a ratio exceeding 32-1/2 per cent for the last ten years.

From the report of the Secretary of the Treasury you will be informed of
the condition of the finances. The balance in the Treasury on the 1st of
January last, as stated in the report of the Secretary of the Treasury
submitted to Congress at the extra session, was $987,345.03. The
receipts into the Treasury during the first three quarters of this year
from all sources amount to $23,467,072.52; the estimated receipts for
the fourth quarter amount to $6,943,095.25, amounting to $30,410,167.77,
and making with the balance in the Treasury on the 1st of January last
$31,397,512.80. The expenditures for the first three quarters of this
year amount to $24,734,346.97. The expenditures for the fourth quarter
as estimated will amount to $7,290,723.73, thus making a total of
$32,025,070.70, and leaving a deficit to be provided for on the 1st of
January next of about $627,557.90.

Of the loan of $12,000,000 which was authorized by Congress at its late
session only $5,432,726.88 have been negotiated. The shortness of time
which it had to run has presented no inconsiderable impediment in the
way of its being taken by capitalists at home, while the same cause
would have operated with much greater force in the foreign market. For
that reason the foreign market has not been resorted to; and it is now
submitted whether it would not be advisable to amend the law by making
what remains undisposed of payable at a more distant day.

Should it be necessary, in any view that Congress may take of the
subject, to revise the existing tariff of duties, I beg leave to say
that in the performance of that most delicate operation moderate
counsels would seem to be the wisest. The Government under which it is
our happiness to live owes its existence to the spirit of compromise
which prevailed among its framers; jarring and discordant opinions could
only have been reconciled by that noble spirit of patriotism which
prompted conciliation and resulted in harmony. In the same spirit the
compromise bill, as it is commonly called, was adopted at the session of
1833. While the people of no portion of the Union will ever hesitate to
pay all necessary taxes for the support of Government, yet an innate
repugnance exists to the imposition of burthens not really necessary for
that object. In imposing duties, however, for the purposes of revenue
a right to discriminate as to the articles on which the duty shall be
laid, as well as the amount, necessarily and most properly exists;
otherwise the Government would be placed in the condition of having to
levy the same duties upon all articles, the productive as well as the
unproductive. The slightest duty upon some might have the effect of
causing their importation to cease, whereas others, entering extensively
into the consumption of the country, might bear the heaviest without any
sensible diminution in the amount imported. So also the Government may
be justified in so discriminating by reference to other considerations
of domestic policy connected with our manufactures. So long as the
duties shall be laid with distinct reference to the wants of the
Treasury no well-founded objection can exist against them. It might
be esteemed desirable that no such augmentation of the taxes should
take place as would have the effect of annulling the land-proceeds
distribution act of the last session, which act is declared to be
inoperative the moment the duties are increased beyond 20 per cent, the
maximum rate established by the compromise act. Some of the provisions
of the compromise act, which will go into effect on the 30th day of June
next, may, however, be found exceedingly inconvenient in practice under
any regulations that Congress may adopt. I refer more particularly to
that relating to the home valuation. A difference in value of the same
articles to some extent will necessarily exist at different ports, but
that is altogether insignificant when compared with the conflicts in
valuation which are likely to arise from the differences of opinion
among the numerous appraisers of merchandise. In many instances the
estimates of value must be conjectural, and thus as many different rates
of value may be established as there are appraisers. These differences
in valuation may also be increased by the inclination which, without
the slightest imputation on their honesty, may arise on the part of the
appraisers in favor of their respective ports of entry. I recommend this
whole subject to the consideration of Congress with a single additional
remark. Certainty and permanency in any system of governmental policy
are in all respects eminently desirable, but more particularly is this
true in all that affects trade and commerce, the operations of which
depend much more on the certainty of their returns and calculations
which embrace distant periods of time than on high bounties or duties,
which are liable to constant fluctuations.

At your late session I invited your attention to the condition of
the currency and exchanges and urged the necessity of adopting such
measures as were consistent with the constitutional competency of the
Government in order to correct the unsoundness of the one and, as far as
practicable, the inequalities of the other. No country can be in the
enjoyment of its full measure of prosperity without the presence of
a medium of exchange approximating to uniformity of value. What is
necessary as between the different nations of the earth is also
important as between the inhabitants of different parts of the same
country. With the first the precious metals constitute the chief medium
of circulation, and such also would be the case as to the last but for
inventions comparatively modern, which have furnished in place of gold
and silver a paper circulation. I do not propose to enter into a
comparative analysis of the merits of the two systems. Such belonged
more properly to the period of the introduction of the paper system. The
speculative philosopher might find inducements to prosecute the inquiry,
but his researches could only lead him to conclude that the paper system
had probably better never have been introduced and that society might
have been much happier without it. The practical statesman has a very
different task to perform. He has to look at things as they are, to take
them as he finds them, to supply deficiencies and to prune excesses as
far as in him lies. The task of furnishing a corrective for derangements
of the paper medium with us is almost inexpressibly great. The power
exerted by the States to charter banking corporations, and which, having
been carried to a great excess, has filled the country with, in most of
the States, an irredeemable paper medium, is an evil which in some way
or other requires a corrective. The rates at which bills of exchange
are negotiated between different parts of the country furnish an index
of the value of the local substitute for gold and silver, which is in
many parts so far depreciated as not to be received except at a large
discount in payment of debts or in the purchase of produce. It could
earnestly be desired that every bank not possessing the means of
resumption should follow the example of the late United States Bank of
Pennsylvania and go into liquidation rather than by refusing to do so
to continue embarrassments in the way of solvent institutions, thereby
augmenting the difficulties incident to the present condition of things.
Whether this Government, with due regard to the rights of the States,
has any power to constrain the banks either to resume specie payments
or to force them into liquidation, is an inquiry which will not fail
to claim your consideration. In view of the great advantages which are
allowed the corporators, not among the least of which is the authority
contained in most of their charters to make loans to three times the
amount of their capital, thereby often deriving three times as much
interest on the same amount of money as any individual is permitted by
law to receive, no sufficient apology can be urged for a long-continued
suspension of specie payments. Such suspension is productive of the
greatest detriment to the public by expelling from circulation the
precious metals and seriously hazarding the success of any effort that
this Government can make to increase commercial facilities and to
advance the public interests.

This is the more to be regretted and the indispensable necessity for
a sound currency becomes the more manifest when we reflect on the vast
amount of the internal commerce of the country. Of this we have no
statistics nor just data for forming adequate opinions. But there can
be no doubt but that the amount of transportation coastwise by sea, and
the transportation inland by railroads and canals, and by steamboats
and other modes of conveyance over the surface of our vast rivers and
immense lakes, and the value of property carried and interchanged by
these means form a general aggregate to which the foreign commerce of
the country, large as it is, makes but a distant approach.

In the absence of any controlling power over this subject, which, by
forcing a general resumption of specie payments, would at once have the
effect of restoring a sound medium of exchange and would leave to the
country but little to desire, what measure of relief falling within the
limits of our constitutional competency does it become this Government
to adopt? It was my painful duty at your last session, under the weight
of most solemn obligations, to differ with Congress on the measures
which it proposed for my approval, and which it doubtless regarded as
corrective of existing evils. Subsequent reflection and events since
occurring have only served to confirm me in the opinions then
entertained and frankly expressed. I must be permitted to add that no
scheme of governmental policy unaided by individual exertions can be
available for ameliorating the present condition of things. Commercial
modes of exchange and a good currency are but the necessary means of
commerce and intercourse, not the direct productive sources of wealth.
Wealth can only be accumulated by the earnings of industry and the
savings of frugality, and nothing can be more ill judged than to look
to facilities in borrowing or to a redundant circulation for the power
of discharging pecuniary obligations. The country is full of resources
and the people full of energy, and the great and permanent remedy
for present embarrassments must be sought in industry, economy, the
observance of good faith, and the favorable influence of time. In
pursuance of a pledge given to you in my last message to Congress, which
pledge I urge as an apology for adventuring to present you the details
of any plan, the Secretary of the Treasury will be ready to submit to
you, should you require it, a plan of finance which, while it throws
around the public treasure reasonable guards for its protection and
rests on powers acknowledged in practice to exist from the origin of
the Government, will at the same time furnish to the country a sound
paper medium and afford all reasonable facilities for regulating the
exchanges. When submitted, you will perceive in it a plan amendatory of
the existing laws in relation to the Treasury Department, subordinate in
all respects to the will of Congress directly and the will of the people
indirectly, self-sustaining should it be found in practice to realize
its promises in theory, and repealable at the pleasure of Congress. It
proposes by effectual restraints and by invoking the true spirit of our
institutions to separate the purse from the sword, or, more properly to
speak, denies any other control to the President over the agents who may
be selected to carry it into execution but what may be indispensably
necessary to secure the fidelity of such agents, and by wise regulations
keeps plainly apart from each other private and public funds. It
contemplates the establishment of a board of control at the seat of
government, with agencies at prominent commercial points or wherever
else Congress shall direct, for the safe-keeping and disbursement of the
public moneys, and a substitution at the option of the public creditor
of Treasury notes in lieu of gold and silver. It proposes to limit the
issues to an amount not to exceed $15,000,000 without the express
sanction of the legislative power. It also authorizes the receipt of
individual deposits of gold and silver to a limited amount, and the
granting certificates of deposit divided into such sums as may be called
for by the depositors. It proceeds a step further and authorizes the
purchase and sale of domestic bills and drafts resting on a real and
substantial basis, payable at sight or having but a short time to run,
and drawn on places not less than 100 miles apart, which authority,
except in so far as may be necessary for Government purposes
exclusively, is only to be exerted upon the express condition that its
exercise shall not be prohibited by the State in which the agency is
situated. In order to cover the expenses incident to the plan, it will
be authorized to receive moderate premiums for certificates issued on
deposits and on bills bought and sold, and thus, as far as its dealings
extend, to furnish facilities to commercial intercourse at the lowest
possible rates and to subduct from the earnings of industry the least
possible sum. It uses the State banks at a distance from the agencies
as auxiliaries without imparting any power to trade in its name.
It is subjected to such guards and restraints as have appeared to be
necessary. It is the creature of law and exists only at the pleasure of
the Legislature. It is made to rest on an actual specie basis in order
to redeem the notes at the places of issue, produces no dangerous
redundancy of circulation, affords no temptation to speculation, is
attended by no inflation of prices, is equable in its operation, makes
the Treasury notes (which it may use along with the certificates of
deposit and the notes of specie-paying banks) convertible at the place
where collected, receivable in payment of Government dues, and without
violating any principle of the Constitution affords the Government and
the people such facilities as are called for by the wants of both. Such,
it has appeared to me, are its recommendations, and in view of them it
will be submitted, whenever you may require it, to your consideration.

I am not able to perceive that any fair and candid objection can be
urged against the plan, the principal outlines of which I have thus
presented. I can not doubt but that the notes which it proposes to
furnish at the voluntary option of the public creditor, issued in lieu
of the revenue and its certificates of deposit, will be maintained
at an equality with gold and silver everywhere. They are redeemable in
gold and silver on demand at the places of issue. They are receivable
everywhere in payment of Government dues. The Treasury notes are limited
to an amount of one-fourth less than the estimated annual receipts of
the Treasury, and in addition they rest upon the faith of the Government
for their redemption. If all these assurances are not sufficient to make
them available, then the idea, as it seems to me, of furnishing a sound
paper medium of exchange may be entirely abandoned.

If a fear be indulged that the Government may be tempted to run into
excess in its issues at any future day, it seems to me that no such
apprehension can reasonably be entertained until all confidence in the
representatives of the States and of the people, as well as of the
people themselves, shall be lost. The weightiest considerations of
policy require that the restraints now proposed to be thrown around the
measure should not for light causes be removed. To argue against any
proposed plan its liability to possible abuse is to reject every
expedient, since everything dependent on human action is liable
to abuse. Fifteen millions of Treasury notes may be issued as the
_maximum_, but a discretionary power is to be given to the board of
control under that sum, and every consideration will unite in leading
them to feel their way with caution. For the first eight years of the
existence of the late Bank of the United States its circulation barely
exceeded $4,000,000, and for five of its most prosperous years it was
about equal to $16,000,000; furthermore, the authority given to receive
private deposits to a limited amount and to issue certificates in such
sums as may be called for by the depositors may so far fill up the
channels of circulation as greatly to diminish the necessity of any
considerable issue of Treasury notes. A restraint upon the amount of
private deposits has seemed to be indispensably necessary from an
apprehension, thought to be well founded, that in any emergency of trade
confidence might be so far shaken in the banks as to induce a withdrawal
from them of private deposits with a view to insure their unquestionable
safety when deposited with the Government, which might prove eminently
disastrous to the State banks. Is it objected that it is proposed to
authorize the agencies to deal in bills of exchange? It is answered that
such dealings are to be carried on at the lowest possible premium, are
made to rest on an unquestionably sound basis, are designed to reimburse
merely the expenses which would otherwise devolve upon the Treasury, and
are in strict subordination to the decision of the Supreme Court in the
case of the Bank of Augusta against Earle, and other reported cases, and
thereby avoids all conflict with State jurisdiction, which I hold to be
indispensably requisite. It leaves the banking privileges of the States
without interference, looks to the Treasury and the Union, and while
furnishing every facility to the first is careful of the interests of
the last. But above all, it is created by law, is amendable by law, and
is repealable by law, and, wedded as I am to no theory, but looking
solely to the advancement of the public good, I shall be among the very
first to urge its repeal if it be found not to subserve the purposes and
objects for which it may be created. Nor will the plan be submitted in
any overweening confidence in the sufficiency of my own judgment, but
with much greater reliance on the wisdom and patriotism of Congress.
I can not abandon this subject without urging upon you in the most
emphatic manner, whatever may be your action on the suggestions which
I have felt it to be my duty to submit, to relieve the Chief Executive
Magistrate, by any and all constitutional means, from a controlling
power over the public Treasury. If in the plan proposed, should you deem
it worthy of your consideration, that separation is not as complete as
you may desire, you will doubtless amend it in that particular. For
myself, I disclaim all desire to have any control over the public moneys
other than what is indispensably necessary to execute the laws which you
may pass.

Nor can I fail to advert in this connection to the debts which many of
the States of the Union have contracted abroad and under which they
continue to labor. That indebtedness amounts to a sum not less than
$200,000,000, and which has been retributed to them for the most part
in works of internal improvement which are destined to prove of vast
importance in ultimately advancing their prosperity and wealth. For the
debts thus contracted the States are alone responsible. I can do no more
than express the belief that each State will feel itself bound by every
consideration of honor as well as of interest to meet its engagements
with punctuality. The failure, however, of any one State to do so should
in no degree affect the credit of the rest, and the foreign capitalist
will have no just cause to experience alarm as to all other State stocks
because any one or more of the States may neglect to provide with
punctuality the means of redeeming their engagements. Even such States,
should there be any, considering the great rapidity with which their
resources are developing themselves, will not fail to have the means
at no very distant day to redeem their obligations to the uttermost
farthing; nor will I doubt but that, in view of that honorable conduct
which has evermore governed the States and the people of the Union, they
will each and all resort to every legitimate expedient before they will
forego a faithful compliance with their obligations.

From the report of the Secretary of War and other reports accompanying
it you will be informed of the progress which has been made in the
fortifications designed for the protection of our principal cities,
roadsteads, and inland frontier during the present year, together with
their true state and condition. They will be prosecuted to completion
with all the expedition which the means placed by Congress at the
disposal of the Executive will allow.

I recommend particularly to your consideration that portion of the
Secretary's report which proposes the establishment of a chain of
military posts from Council Bluffs to some point on the Pacific Ocean
within our limits. The benefit thereby destined to accrue to our
citizens engaged in the fur trade over that wilderness region, added
to the importance of cultivating friendly relations with savage tribes
inhabiting it, and at the same time of giving protection to our frontier
settlements and of establishing the means of safe intercourse between
the American settlements at the mouth of the Columbia River and those on
this side of the Rocky Mountains, would seem to suggest the importance
of carrying into effect the recommendations upon this head with as
little delay as may be practicable.

The report of the Secretary of the Navy will place you in possession
of the present condition of that important arm of the national defense.
Every effort will be made to add to its efficiency, and I can not too
strongly urge upon you liberal appropriations to that branch of the
public service. Inducements of the weightiest character exist for the
adoption of this course of policy. Our extended and otherwise exposed
maritime frontier calls for protection, to the furnishing of which an
efficient naval force is indispensable. We look to no foreign conquests,
nor do we propose to enter into competition with any other nation for
supremacy on the ocean; but it is due not only to the honor but to the
security of the people of the United States that no nation should be
permitted to invade our waters at pleasure and subject our towns and
villages to conflagration or pillage. Economy in all branches of the
public service is due from all the public agents to the people, but
parsimony alone would suggest the withholding of the necessary means for
the protection of our domestic firesides from invasion and our national
honor from disgrace. I would most earnestly recommend to Congress to
abstain from all appropriations for objects not absolutely necessary;
but I take upon myself, without a moment of hesitancy, all the
responsibility of recommending the increase and prompt equipment of
that gallant Navy which has lighted up every sea with its victories
and spread an imperishable glory over the country.

The report of the Postmaster-General will claim your particular
attention, not only because of the valuable suggestions which it
contains, but because of the great importance which at all times
attaches to that interesting branch of the public service. The increased
expense of transporting the mail along the principal routes necessarily
claims the public attention, and has awakened a corresponding solicitude
on the part of the Government. The transmission of the mail must keep
pace with those facilities of intercommunication which are every day
becoming greater through the building of railroads and the application
of steam power, but it can not be disguised that in order to do so the
Post-Office Department is subjected to heavy exactions. The lines of
communication between distant parts of the Union are to a great extent
occupied by railroads, which, in the nature of things, possess a
complete monopoly, and the Department is therefore liable to heavy and
unreasonable charges. This evil is destined to great increase in future,
and some timely measure may become necessary to guard against it.

I feel it my duty to bring under your consideration a practice which has
grown up in the administration of the Government, and which, I am deeply
convinced, ought to be corrected. I allude to the exercise of the power
which usage rather than reason has vested in the Presidents of removing
incumbents from office in order to substitute others more in favor with
the dominant party. My own conduct in this respect has been governed by
a conscientious purpose to exercise the removing power only in cases of
unfaithfulness or inability, or in those in which its exercise appeared
necessary in order to discountenance and suppress that spirit of active
partisanship on the part of holders of office which not only withdraws
them from the steady and impartial discharge of their official duties,
but exerts an undue and injurious influence over elections and degrades
the character of the Government itself, inasmuch as it exhibits the
Chief Magistrate as being a party through his agents in the secret plots
or open workings of political parties.

In respect to the exercise of this power nothing should be left to
discretion which may safely be regulated by law, and it is of high
importance to restrain as far as possible the stimulus of personal
interests in public elections. Considering the great increase which has
been made in public offices in the last quarter of a century and the
probability of further increase, we incur the hazard of witnessing
violent political contests, directed too often to the single object of
retaining office by those who are in or obtaining it by those who are
out. Under the influence of these convictions I shall cordially concur
in any constitutional measure for regulating and, by regulating,
restraining the power of removal.

I suggest for your consideration the propriety of making without further
delay some specific application of the funds derived under the will of
Mr. Smithson, of England, for the diffusion of knowledge, and which have
heretofore been vested in public stocks until such time as Congress
should think proper to give them a specific direction. Nor will you, I
feel confident, permit any abatement of the principal of the legacy to
be made should it turn out that the stocks in which the investments have
been made have undergone a depreciation.

In conclusion I commend to your care the interests of this District, for
which you are the exclusive legislators. Considering that this city is
the residence of the Government and for a large part of the year of
Congress, and considering also the great cost of the public buildings
and the propriety of affording them at all times careful protection, it
seems not unreasonable that Congress should contribute toward the
expense of an efficient police.

JOHN TYLER.




SPECIAL MESSAGES.


WASHINGTON, _December 7, 1841_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit herewith a report from the Secretary of War, in compliance
with a resolution of the Senate of the 3d of March last, calling for a
comparative statement of the condition of the public defenses, of all
the preparations and means of defense, and of the actual and authorized
strength of the Army on the 1st of January, 1829, and the 1st of
January, 1841.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _December 7, 1841_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit herewith a report from the War Department, in compliance with
so much of the resolution of the Senate of March 3, 1841, respecting the
military and naval defenses of the country, as relates to the defenses
under the superintendence of that Department.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _December 8, 1841_.

_To the House of Representatives of the United States_:

In answer to the resolution of the House of Representatives of the 4th
of September last, requesting information touching the relations between
the United States and the Republic of Texas, I transmit a report from
the Secretary of State, to whom the resolution was referred.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _December 8, 1841_.

_To the House of Representatives of the United States_:

I transmit herewith a report from the Secretary of the Treasury,
exhibiting certain transfers of appropriations which have been made in
that Department in pursuance of the power vested in the President of the
United States by the act of Congress of the 3d of March, 1809, entitled
"An act further to amend the several acts for the establishment and
regulation of the Treasury, War, and Navy Departments."

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _December 29, 1841_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I herewith transmit to the Senate a report[15] from the Secretary of
State, in answer to their resolution of the 27th instant.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 15: Stating that no proposition has been made by either the
United States or Great Britain relative to the mutual right of search.]



WASHINGTON, _January 4, 1842_.

_To the House of Representatives of the United States_:

I herewith communicate a report and statement from the Secretary of
State, in answer to a resolution of the House of the 19th of June, 1841,
requesting the aggregate amount of each description of persons within
the several districts of the United States by counties and principal
towns.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _January 10, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit to the Senate, for its consideration with a view to
ratification, a convention between the United States and the Republic
of Peru, signed at Lima on the 17th of March last, providing for the
adjustment and satisfaction of certain claims of citizens of the United
States against the Government of that Republic.

For the purpose of acquainting the Senate with the nature and amount of
those demands and with the course of the negotiation, I also communicate
a copy of such parts of the correspondence of the agents of the two
Governments as relate thereto.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _January 17, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit to the Senate a report from the Secretary of State, relative
to the proceedings and final decision of the commissioners under the
convention with the Republic of Texas upon the subject of the boundary
between the United States and that Republic.

JOHN TYLER.

[The same message was sent to the House of Representatives.]



WASHINGTON, _January 18, 1842_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I transmit to the House of Representatives, in answer to the resolution
of the 14th instant, a report[16] from the Secretary of State and the
papers by which it was accompanied.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 16: Relating to American citizens captured near Santa Fe,
Mexico, by the Mexican army.]



WASHINGTON, _January 19, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit to the Senate herewith a report[17] from the Secretary of
State, with accompanying papers, in answer to their resolution of the
11th instant.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 17: Transmitting correspondence relative to the action of the
authorities of Nassau, New Providence, in the imprisonment of slaves
charged with mutiny and murder, the refusal to surrender them to the
United States consul for trial in the United States, and the liberation
of slaves, all of said slaves being a part of the cargo of the United
States brig _Creole_.]



JANUARY 27, 1842.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a report[18] of the Secretary of War, in answer to
the resolution of the House of Representatives of the 9th August, 1841.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 18: Relating to the origin of the Seminole war, slaves
captured during said war by United States troops, etc.]



WASHINGTON, _February 5, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit herewith to the Senate copies of a report and letter from the
commissioners appointed by the President for the exploration and survey
of the boundary line between the States of Maine and New Hampshire and
the conterminous British Provinces, showing the progress made in that
work during the past season, and submitting an estimate, to which I
invite the attention of Congress, of the funds that will be requisite
for completing the surveys yet to be made on the boundary, and the
office work consequent thereon, and for completing the maps of surveys
already made.

JOHN TYLER.

[The same message was sent to the House of Representatives.]



NEW YORK, _January 4, 1842_.

Hon. DANIEL WEBSTER,

_Secretary of State_:

The undersigned, commissioners appointed by the President of the United
States for the purpose of exploring and surveying the boundary line
between the States of Maine and New Hampshire and the British Provinces
in North America, respectfully report--

That in pursuance of the duties of their appointment they have in the
course of the late season performed the following surveys and
explorations:

1. The meridian line of the monument at the source of the St. Croix has,
under the direction of J.D. Graham, been carefully and accurately traced
from the station in the vicinity of Houlton where the labors of the year
1840 terminated to a point 4 miles north of the St. John River in the
vicinity of the Grand Falls, being a distance of 81 miles from the
monument. The timber has been removed along this line to a width
necessary for its accurate prolongation and for the requisite
astronomical observations at various points upon it, and a correct
profile, or vertical section, has also been obtained by means of the
spirit level the whole of the distance above mentioned.

Besides the astronomical observations necessary to obtain and continue
the due north direction upon this line, numerous magnetic observations
have also been made at a number of points upon it, in order to show the
physical causes which must operate to produce serious discrepancies
between a meridian line properly traced and such a one as has actually
separated the jurisdiction of the two Governments since the attempt in
the years 1817 and 1818 to define and mark this portion of the boundary
under the provisions of the treaty of Ghent, although no portion of that
line was ever ratified or made binding upon the parties to the treaty.

Upon this portion of the survey there have been chained, including
measured offsets to the old line and to other important points, 85
miles.

Four hundred and fifty-two transit observations of heavenly bodies have
been made, aided by three excellent chronometers, for the determination
of the true meridian direction, most of which also served for the
computation of the correct time.

For the determination of the longitude of this meridian west of the
Royal Observatory of Greenwich and the latitudes of four important
points upon it there were made eighty-five complete sets of astronomical
observations, including altitudes of the sun and stars and the meridian
transits of the moon and moon-culminating stars.

The number of barometric observations made upon the line and in its
vicinity is 5,767; besides which there were made at Calais, for
comparison with the level of mean tide on the St. Croix, 1,336 similar
observations.

There have been determined in altitude above or below the level of the
monument, by means of the spirit level, 1,716 points, and the altitudes
of 1,816 other points have been similarly observed in order to verify
the altitude of the monument above the level of mean tide at Calais.

For the determination of the magnetic variation at a number of points on
the meridian line, more than 200 observations have been made upon four
different needles, and for the determination of the magnetic dip at four
principal stations on the same meridian 300 observations have been made
upon two different needles.

Under the directions of the same commissioner the line claimed by Great
Britain from Mars Hill and that recently chosen by Messrs. Mudge and
Featherstonhaugh have been surveyed westward from the meridian line to
the highlands near the head waters of the Aroostook, and the necessary
data obtained for the construction of a correct map of that portion of
country.

Upon this survey, without reckoning the distances traveled for
approaching many important points of observation, there have been
actually measured with the chain and coursed with proper instruments 267
miles, including the Aroostook River from its mouth to the point where
it receives the Lapawmpeag Stream, a profile of the country from the
head waters of the Moluncus to the St. John at Fish River, and such
other important lines as were necessary for obtaining the correct
topography of the country, and the altitudes of many points upon the
line claimed by Great Britain as the boundary, in the vicinity of the
Aroostook, have been obtained.

Ten principal points have been determined in latitude and longitude by
means of 115 sets of astronomical observations, aided by three good
chronometers, and seventeen other points have been determined by
triangulation with a portable theodolite. Two hundred and five points
have been determined in altitude by means of 1,319 barometric
observations, and seventeen by means of the theodolite and spirit level.
One hundred and ninety-two observations have been made for determining
the variation of the magnetic needle at three important points.

The field duties above mentioned are considered to furnish sufficient
data for a correct map of the line reported upon by the late British
commissioners, Colonel Mudge and Mr. Featherstonhaugh, between the
St. John River and the head of the Aroostook, besides some lateral
explorations of considerable extent that will have an important bearing
upon this branch of the subject. The work accomplished is full as much
as could have been properly done in a single season, marked, as the
last was, by an unusual drought of long continuance, which rendered
it impossible to ascend, even with light canoes, some of the smaller
streams, especially those forming the northwesternmost sources of the
Aroostook. These might be profitably explored another season.

2. The division under the direction of A. Talcott has, besides verifying
a part of the line of 1840 and tracing the course of Indian Stream (a
branch of the Connecticut) to its source, explored and surveyed the line
of highlands which extends from the Kennebec road to the Temiscouata
portage, and so much of the line claimed by Great Britain as extends
from the Kennebec road to the eastward as far as the head of the
Aroostook River.

In the course of this survey, without counting the lines of approach
or ground traveled over more than once, 703 miles have been passed over
and such notes taken as will form the basis of a map. Of these 703
miles, 335 are upon the lines respectively claimed as boundaries by
the Governments of the United States and Great Britain. In the course
of these surveys, in order to the geographical determination of the
position of the line, the latitudes of 54 points have been determined
by means of 114 sets of altitudes of heavenly bodies, and the sets of
subsidiary observations for time and for the determination of longitude
by chronometers amount to 245. The number of points at which
observations have been made by barometers for the purpose of determining
their altitudes is 930, of which 669 are upon the boundaries
respectively claimed by the two countries. The number of separate sets
of barometric readings made at these points amounts to 1,981, while
those made at the fixed stations, with which the former are to be
compared, amount to 1,671.

3. The division under the direction of J. Renwick has explored or
surveyed the line of highlands from the southeastern extremity of Lake
Matapediac to the vicinity of the river Du Loup, where the line of
survey has been connected with that of A. Talcott. In this survey a gap
is yet left of a few miles on the western side of the valley of the
Rimouski near its source.

In the course of the operations of this division 586 miles have been
passed over and such notes taken as will form the basis of a map. Of
these 586 miles, 275 have been actually measured, 209 are upon the
boundary claimed by the United States, and about 30 upon the line
pointed out by the proclamation of the King of Great Britain of the 7th
of October, 1763, as the southern boundary of the Province of Quebec,
making in all 239 miles of the height of land.

In the course of these surveys, in order to the geographical
determination of the position of the line, the latitudes of 47 points
have been determined by means of 85 sets of altitudes of heavenly
bodies, and the sets of subsidiary observations for time and for the
determination of longitude by chronometers amount to 130. The number
of points at which observations have been made by barometers for the
purpose of determining their altitudes is 407, of which 267 are upon the
boundary claimed by the United States. The number of separate sets of
barometric readings made at these points amounts to 1,153, while those
made at the fixed stations amount to 837.

The division of Major Graham not having returned from the field
until within a few days, neither the reduction of the astronomical
observations nor any of the office work preparatory to a general map
has yet been commenced by his division.

The office work of the divisions of A. Talcott and J. Renwick has been
steadily carried on since the return of those commissioners from the
field in the month of October, and great progress has been made in the
calculations and plotting preparatory to the construction of maps, and
necessary as materials for a general report.

In this state of the work of the several divisions the undersigned find
themselves under the necessity of communicating to the State Department
that the further progress of their operations is about to be arrested by
the exhaustion of the appropriation, and of stating that unless speedy
provision be made for the supply of the necessary funds the report of
their operations can not be made up in time to be laid before Congress
at its present session.

The position of the finances of the commission may be seen by the
following statement:


  Of the appropriation of $75,000 there have been drawn--

  By J. Renwick   $21,000
  By A. Talcott    24,200
  By J.D. Graham   25,000
  Total drawn      70,200

  Leaving in the Treasury of the United States $4,800.

  By a careful estimate it is found that to finish the office work of the
  several divisions there will be required over and above any balances in
  the hands of the several commissioners--

  For the division of J. Renwick                        $3,000
  For the division of A. Talcott                         5,800
  For the division of J.D. Graham, including some
  arrearages due for instruments and to assistant
  engineers attached to this division                    6,500

  Making in all $15,300, and leaving to be provided
  for the completion of the work of the late season    $10,500.


The undersigned can not refrain from stating that the necessity of
applying for further funds was unexpected by each of them individually,
as it is painful to them collectively. There are, however, reasons that
in their opinion are incontrovertible which have led to an expenditure
thus exceeding their estimate submitted to the Secretary of State the
11th of January, 1841:

1. The estimate for the expenses of the division under the direction of
Major Graham amounted to $22,500. This referred only, however, to the
continuation of the survey of the meridian line; and as the country had
been represented by the most authentic maps as generally rising from the
monument to the north, it was inferred that the timber to be cut away
in opening this line through a dense forest would be of the description
generally found upon elevated and dry lands, and the labor supposed to
be requisite was estimated accordingly. So far, however, from this being
the case, 26 miles out of the 32 between the base of Parks Ridge, near
Houlton, and the river Des Chutes (6 miles north of the latitude of Mars
Hill) have actually been found to be below the level of the monument and
intersected by swamps covered with a thick growth of cedar and other
timber common to such land, extremely difficult to cut away. More than
double the labor estimated had therefore to be performed in
accomplishing this and all similar portions of the work, and a
corresponding increase of expense was unavoidable.

In addition to this increased labor upon the meridian line, the division
of Major Graham has executed the surveys between that line and the head
waters of the Aroostook, already given in detail, the expenses for which
were not estimated or included in the sum above mentioned.

The cost of this survey, including the instruments that were required
for it, has amounted to $5,500, and while this sum should be added to
the original estimate for this division, the expenses of the divisions
of the other two commissioners have not in any manner been thereby
diminished, for the actual quantity of work performed by them has
exceeded what was supposed from the best maps extant to be necessary
upon the whole of the lines claimed by the two Governments,
respectively, exclusive of the meridian line, as will hereafter be
shown.

There was another cause which tended in a great degree to augment the
expenses of this division in proportion to the progress of the work,
which it was not within the power of human agency to control, and which
we should not omit to mention here.

The severe drought which prevailed throughout this region of country
during the month of August and the greater part of September caused the
fires which are annually set to the fallen timber upon newly cleared
lands to spread far and wide into the growing forest, and so rapid was
its progress and so serious its ravages as to compel the inhabitants
in many cases to fly for the preservation of life. Some check was
experienced in the duties along the meridian line from the flames that
actually embraced it, but a far more serious one from the dense smoke
which filled the atmosphere almost incessantly for six weeks, and so
obstructed the view as to render it impossible to fix the stations in
advance with the requisite precision.

While the party charged with the astronomical operations was thus
deprived of the opportunity of making scarcely any progress for six
weeks, the expense of maintaining it could not in any way be diminished,
because there was a daily hope that such a change in the weather might
occur as would have removed this difficulty.

In order to make amends as far as practicable for so much time
unavoidably lost, this division continued to prosecute its field duties
north of the forty-seventh degree of latitude until several weeks after
the severities of winter had commenced, with no other protection than
their tents, the commissioner in charge of it believing that the
expectations of the Government and of the country generally would but be
fulfilled by the investigations in relation to this important line being
pushed to the utmost attainable point. But for this it would have been
impossible to have reached the St. John River the late season.

There remains to be surveyed along this meridian line, in order to reach
the northwest angle of Nova Scotia as claimed by the United States,
about 64 miles, to accomplish which will require another season of
active field duty.

2. In the estimate for the work of the divisions of A. Talcott and J.
Renwick it was assumed that the length of the boundary remaining on the
line claimed by the United States was 320 miles, and upon the lines
claimed by Great Britain 170 miles.

Of the latter, about one-half was undertaken by Major Graham's
division,[19] leaving for the estimated distance to be surveyed by the
divisions of A. Talcott and J. Renwick 450 miles.

[Footnote 19: It has already been stated that in the survey of the
portion of this line allotted to Major Graham there were actually
measured upon it, with the chain, 276 miles, and this did not constitute
more than one-half the labor and expense incident to all the duties
enumerated and performed by his division on his portion, so much did the
work required upon this portion of it exceed what was estimated for the
whole of it.]

It will appear by the statement hereinbefore given that the joint
surveys of these two divisions upon the lines of highlands have actually
amounted to 574 miles. Upon the principle of their estimate, the
probable cost of this would have amounted to $49,746.37, and with the
addition for instruments and for the additional cost of the more remote
parts of the line to $57,079.70.

The actual cost, including the foregoing estimate for the completion of
the work, is $54,000.

It will appear, therefore, that when the increased extent of the work
performed over that made the basis of the estimate is considered, the
cost of performing it, so far from having exceeded the estimate, has
fallen short of it by $3,000.

The reason of the discrepancy between the real extent of the line, as
actually measured, and that which formed the basis of the calculation is
that the latter was made by reference to the best existing maps, which
were considered to be entitled to a certain degree of credit. Upon the
close examination which the operations of the late season have afforded,
these maps have been ascertained to be exceedingly erroneous. Well-known
streams have been found to extend in either direction many miles beyond
the points at which their sources have been laid down on the maps, and
great rivers and lakes have, as it were, been discovered, of which no
delineation had ever been given by geographers. The extent of these
errors in remote and difficultly accessible points may be inferred from
what has been found to occur in the part of the region which is most
accessible, best known, and most frequently traversed.

On the Temiscouata portage, a road traveled weekly by the mail of Her
Britannic Majesty, continually passed by the officers of her various
services, which had been carefully surveyed by civil engineers
preparatory to its reconstruction, and which has been traveled by the
surveyors of both countries under the joint commission, it had hitherto
been believed, and it was so represented on all maps, both English and
American, that the line dividing the waters crossed the road three
times. The surveys of the late season show that the boundary claimed by
the United States crosses this road five times, and it became necessary
to explore the culminating points of the valleys of four streams,
instead of two, as had been anticipated. Instances of the same sort, but
which do not admit of verbal description, have occurred on every part of
the lines of highlands.

The two commissioners whose operations are under consideration no doubt
had it in their power to have suspended their operations and returned so
soon as the portion of the appropriation placed at their disposal was so
far exhausted as to leave no more than would be needed to complete their
office work; but they feel satisfied that they would not have been
justified in so doing so long as any portion of the line remained
unsurveyed or the weather would permit a party to keep the field. Thus,
although in the original plan for the partition of the work it was
estimated that their lines would probably be connected in the parallel
of the river Ouelle, about 30 miles south of Temiscouata portage, when
it was found that, from unforeseen delays in the transportation of the
party of J. Renwick by sea to their work, and on the river St. Lawrence
from one station to another, it became doubtful whether he could pass
the Temiscouata portage before the woods became impassable, his
colleague continued his parties in the field until the junction was
effected. In this way, while the expenses of the division of J. Renwick
have not been materially diminished, those of the division of A. Talcott
have been largely increased; but a portion of the general work has been
accomplished which might otherwise have been left incomplete.

The undersigned, in conclusion, beg leave respectfully to urge the
importance of a speedy appropriation to enable them to make up their
report. A delay of any continuance will be productive of evil, either by
enhancing the cost of office work or by rendering it difficult in
consequence of the dispersion of the engineers and surveyors by whom the
field notes have been taken. Upon the completion only of such a report
will it be possible to render apparent how much of the whole task has
been accomplished and how much remains to be performed; and the
Department will then have it in its power to decide whether the part
that has not been completed is of such importance to the question at
issue as to require further operations upon it.

All which is respectfully submitted.

JAS. RENWICK,
  A. TALCOTT,
    J.D. GRAHAM,
     _Commissioners_.



WASHINGTON, _January 25, 1842_.

Hon. DANIEL WEBSTER,

_Secretary of State_.

SIR: The undersigned, commissioners appointed by the President of the
United States for the purpose of surveying and exploring the boundary
line between the States of Maine and New Hampshire and the British
Provinces, beg leave, in compliance with your directions, to submit an
estimate for the operations of the commission for the ensuing year.

So much of your directions as regards the state of the survey and the
amount required to complete the office work preparatory to a report has
already been laid before you in their report of the 4th January, 1842,
prepared in anticipation of your orders. By reference thereto it will
appear that the delineation of the meridian of the source of St. Croix
has not, in spite of every effort on the part of the commissioner to
whom it was assigned, been pursued farther than 81 miles from the
monument. Sixty-four miles, therefore, of the said meridian line remain
to be surveyed before this part of their task is completed. The other
two commissioners, while they would not have hesitated to join in a
final report in case the state of the survey of the meridian line would
have permitted it, are aware that the hasty manner in which their work
was performed, in anticipation of completing the object of their
appointment during the past year, leaves room for a more accurate
examination of some parts of the lines they have surveyed. Some
portions, also, of the lines intrusted to them, respectively, were not
reached; and, in addition, a part of the survey which was contemplated
in their original instructions from your predecessor was not included in
their estimates for the past year, in consequence of its having only a
collateral relation to the main object.

Thus the surveys respectively undertaken by Messrs. Talcott and Graham
of the lines claimed on the part of Great Britain and by Messrs. Mudge
and Featherstonhaugh, although brought near to each other, have not been
united, and a part of the highlands claimed by the United States near
the source of the Rimouski was not reached by the parties of Professor
Renwick.

The height of a part of the line explored by Captain Talcott in 1840,
lying at the source of Arnolds River, was not determined for the want of
a barometer.

Two or three miles in length of the line of highlands near the source of
the river Du Loup require to be reexamined.

The longitudes of Lake Megantic, Lake Etchemin, the source of the
Metjarmette, upon the line of Captain Talcott, and of some one point
on the line of Professor Renwick ought to be ascertained with greater
precision than the time that could be allowed during the last season
would permit.

The instructions of Mr. Forsyth contemplated an exploration of the
highlands described in the proclamation of 1763 as beginning on the
north shore of the Bay of Chaleurs. The existence of a continuous
elevated region from the tide of that bay to the termination of the
exploring meridian line has been ascertained in a manner satisfactory to
the commission, but the heights have not been measured on that part of
it which lies nearest to the Bay of Chaleurs.

Under these circumstances the undersigned are of opinion that as no
delay in the presentation of a final report will arise from further
explorations of the parts of the territory thus pointed out and the more
accurate examination of the uncertain matters, it would add to the
confidence which may be placed in their results that a party be employed
under the direction of each of the above-named commissioners upon the
said work. For this object it is estimated--

1. That $25,000 in all, say $12,500 to be expended under the direction
of each of the two above-named commissioners, will suffice. A less sum
than this will not keep two parties in the field during the working
season; a larger sum could not advantageously be expended on this part
of the work.

2. In estimating the amount necessary for completing the delineation of
the meridian of the source of the river St. Croix, it will be borne in
mind that numerous astronomical observations must be made in aid of the
operations with the transit instrument, in order constantly to preserve
the true north direction, a condition of the utmost consequence, not
alone as affecting the extent of territory that will be embraced by
it, but more particularly because the character and position of the
highlands alluded to in the treaty of 1783 would be exhibited in a very
different light as encountered by a line running _due north_, as is
required by the treaty, and by one varying even in a slight degree from
that direction. This principle has already been exhibited in a striking
manner by the trace of the meridian line as far as it has now
progressed, for instead of encountering highlands in the latitude of
Mars Hill having a claim to be considered those described in the treaty
as the intended boundary between the two countries, the line as recently
traced actually passes that latitude at an elevation of less than
10 feet above the level of the monument, and the greatest elevation
encountered by this line in passing over any spur connected with Mars
Hill is 63 feet above the level of the monument. In advance of this spur
the line becomes again depressed below the level of the monument at
several points before it reaches the Aroostook.

These, however, are only a few of the many facts that might be adduced
from the surveys already made to show how important it is to the
question at issue that every necessary means to avail of the aids
of science should be adopted in order to preserve scrupulously the
direction specified in the treaty while tracing this line. It must also
be remembered that in the further prosecution of this duty a wilderness
has to be traversed, totally uninhabited and totally without roads. The
only means of progressing through it and of transporting the necessary
provisions and the instruments indispensable to accuracy will be by
means of canoes, for supplying two or three depots at points where Grand
River and the waters of the Restigouche intersect the line, leaving the
whole transportation along the meridian to be performed by packmen, or
men carrying burdens on their backs. That the usual avenue to give an
unimpeded view along the line must be opened through a dense forest,
which in the neighborhood of all streams crossing it will still be
found to consist of that swampy growth described in the report from the
undersigned of the 4th of January instant as requiring so much labor to
cut through it.

With all these circumstances in view, the following estimate for the
completion of the survey of the meridian line and for some further
surveys between that line and the source of the Aroostook is submitted;
and it is intended to embrace the expense of completing both the field
and the office wort that will require to be done in order to a final
accomplishment of the duties:


  _Estimate for the meridian line_.

  1. Pay of 4 assistant engineers from May 1, 1842,
     to March 31, 1843, being 304 days, at $4 per day each    $4,864.00

  2. Pay of 3 other assistant engineers from May 1, 1842,
     to December 31, 1842, being 275 days, at $3 per day each  2,475.00

  3. Hire of 30 men as axmen, and for preparing, constructing,
     and erecting stations and signals in advance, from June 1
     to November 30, 1842, being 183 days, at $1 each per day  5,490.00

  4. Hire of 30 other men as instrument carriers, chain
     bearers, canoe men, and packmen for 183 days, as
     above, at $1 per day each                                 5,490.00

  5. Hire of 1 carpenter and 2 cooks 183 days, as above,
     at $1.25 per day each                                       686.25

  6. Subsistence of 1 commissioner, 7 assistant engineers,
     1 carpenter, 2 cooks, and 60 men, as above, being in all
     71 persons, while in the field, 183 days at 50 cents per
     day each, including transportation of provisions to
     Grand Falls of St. John, or first depot                   5,496.50

  7. Purchase of barometers and repairs of instruments
     heretofore used                                             800.00

  8. Salary of commissioner                                    3,000.00

  9. Contingencies, including Stationery, office rent,
     and fuel, and transportation of engineers and
     commissioner to and from the field                        1,500.00

     Total required for the meridian line                     30,801.75


  That is to say, $30,801.75, making the whole amount for the work yet
  to be performed in the field on all parts of the boundary and for the
  office work that will be consequent from the said field work $55,801.75

All which is respectfully submitted.

JAS. RENWICK,
  A. TALCOTT,
    J.D. GRAHAM,
      _Commissioners_.


RECAPITULATION.

  1. Amount of estimate for completing the surveys yet
     required to be made on the boundary, as above stated    $55,801.75

  2. Amount of estimate rendered with report of January 4,
     1842, for completing maps of surveys already made, etc.  10,500.00

  Aggregate amount required                                   66,301.75



WASHINGTON, _February 9, 1842_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

In answer to a resolution of the House of Representatives of the 7th of
February, 1842, in the following words--

_Resolved_, That the President of the United States inform this House
under what authority the commission, consisting of George Poindexter
and others, for the investigation of the concerns of the New York
custom-house was raised; what were the purposes and objects of said
commission; how many persons have in any way been connected with it, and
the compensation received or to be received by each; and the aggregate
amount of every description of said commission, and out of what fund the
said expenditures have been or are to be paid--

I have to state that the authority for instituting the commission
mentioned in said resolution is the authority vested in the President of
the United States to "take care that the laws be faithfully executed,
and to give to Congress from time to time information on the state of
the Union, and to recommend to their consideration such measures as he
shall judge necessary and expedient."

The expediency, if not the necessity, of inquiries into the transactions
of our custom-houses, especially in cases where abuses and malpractices
are alleged, must be obvious to Congress, and that investigations of
this kind were expected to be made appears from the provision in the
twenty-first section of the act of 1799, "which enjoins collectors
of the customs to submit their books, papers, and accounts to the
inspection of such persons as shall be appointed for that purpose."

The purposes and objects of the commission will be explained by the
commission itself, a copy of which, together with information on the
other subjects mentioned in the resolution, will at the proper time be
laid before Congress.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _February 11, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In compliance with the request of the governor of the Territory of Iowa,
I have the honor to submit the accompanying memorials[20] and joint
resolutions[20] of the council and house of representatives of that
Territory to your consideration.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 20: Asking an appropriation to defray the expenses growing out
of the dispute between the United States, within the Territory of Iowa,
and the State of Missouri relative to the southern boundary line, an
appropriation to defray the expenses of a convention for the formation
of a State constitution, etc.]



WASHINGTON, _February 14, 1842_.

_To the House of Representatives of the United States_:

In compliance with a resolution of the House of Representatives of the
3d instant, I transmit herewith a report[21] from the Secretary of State,
with copies of the papers requested by the resolution.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 21: Relating to letters written in March, 1841, by Andrew
Stevenson, United States minister at the Court of Great Britain,
to Isaac Hull, commander of the United States squadron in the
Mediterranean, which caused a part of that squadron to return to the
United States.]



WASHINGTON, _February 16, 1842_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a communication addressed to me by the Secretary of
War, in relation to certain contracts entered into by a board of medical
officers appointed for that purpose for the purchase of sites on the
western waters for the erection of marine hospitals; and concurring
fully in his views of the subject, I recommend that either an
appropriation of $44,721 be made for the purpose of satisfying the
claims of the individuals with whom the contracts were made or that the
Department of War be authorized to reconvey to them their lands and
annul the contracts.

JOHN TYLER.


WASHINGTON, _February 18, 1842_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States_:

I have the honor to invite the attention of Congress to the accompanying
letter, addressed to me by the Secretary of State. You will doubtless
perceive the importance of furnishing a uniform rule for the guidance
of the public officers in the matter referred to in the Secretary's
letter.[22]

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 22: Relating to the mode of paying salaries, etc., of
ministers and other diplomatic agents of the United States at the
several Courts of Europe.]



WASHINGTON, _February 19, 1842_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

In compliance with the resolution of the House of Representatives
of the 8th instant, I have the honor to submit the accompanying
communication[23] from the Secretary of State and the correspondence
on the subject referred to by the resolution of the House.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 23: Relating to the colonial history of New York.]



WASHINGTON, _February 21, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit to the Senate herewith a report from the Secretary of State,
with an accompanying paper,[24] in answer to their resolution of the
18th instant.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 24: Extract of a letter from the Department of State to the
United States minister at London relative to the case of the brig
_Creole_.]



WASHINGTON, _February 26, 1842_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

The resolution of the House of Representatives of the 21st instant,
requesting the President of the United States to communicate to that
body, "if not incompatible with the public interest, the state of the
negotiation between the United States and the Government of Great
Britain in relation to the northeastern boundary of the State of Maine,
and also all correspondence on that subject between the two Governments
not hitherto communicated," has been transmitted to me. Desirous always
to lay before Congress and the public everything affecting the state of
the country to the fullest extent consistent with propriety and
prudence, I have to inform the House of Representatives that in my
judgment no communication could be made by me at this time on the
subject of its resolution without detriment or danger to the public
interests.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _February 28, 1842_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I have the honor to submit copies of the correspondence[25] and other
documents called for by the resolution of the House of Representatives
of the 2d February.

I am not informed of the existence of any official opinion of the late
Judge Johnson on the unconstitutionality of the act or acts of the State
of South Carolina upon the subject referred to in the resolution.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 25: Relating to an act of the legislature of South Carolina
providing for the imprisonment of free negroes found on board vessels
entering any of the ports of that State, complaints of the British
Government relative to the operation of said act, etc.]



WASHINGTON, _March 8, 1842_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I feel it to be my duty to invite your attention to the accompanying
communication from the Secretary of the Treasury, in relation to the
probable demands which will be made upon the Treasury for the present
quarter. It will be seen that, without arresting the requisitions which
will be made by the War and Navy Departments for the months of March,
April, and May, there will be an unprovided-for deficit of upward of
three millions.

I can not bring myself, however, to believe that it will enter into the
view of any department of the Government to arrest works of defense now
in progress of completion or vessels under construction or preparation
for sea. Having due regard to the unsettled condition of our foreign
relations and the exposed situation of our inland and maritime frontier,
I should feel myself wanting in my duty to the country if I could
hesitate in urging upon Congress all necessary appropriations for
placing it in an attitude of strength and security. Such recommendation,
however, has heretofore been made in full reliance as well on Congress
as on the well-known patriotism of the people, their high sense of
national honor, and their determination to defend our soil from the
possibility, however remote, of a hostile invasion.

The diminution in the revenue arising from the great diminution of
duties under what is commonly called the compromise act necessarily
involves the Treasury in embarrassments, which have been for some years
palliated by the temporary expedient of issuing Treasury notes--an
expedient which, affording no permanent relief, has imposed upon
Congress from time to time the necessity of replacing the old by a new
issue. The amount outstanding on the 4th of March, 1840, varies in no
great degree from the amount which will be outstanding on the 1st
of January next, while in the interim the new issues are rendered
equivalent to the redemption of the old, and at the end of the fiscal
year leave an augmented pressure on the finances by the accumulation
of interest.

The contemplated revision of the tariff of duties may, and doubtless
will, lead in the end to a relief of the Treasury from these constantly
recurring embarrassments, but it must be obvious that time will be
necessary to realize the full anticipations of financial benefit from
any modification of the tariff laws. In the meantime I submit to
Congress the suggestions made by the Secretary, and invite its prompt
and speedy action.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _March 8, 1842_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

In my message of the 7th of December I suggested to Congress the
propriety, and in some degree the necessity, of making proper provisions
by law within the pale of the Constitution for the removal at their
commencement and at the option of the party of all such cases as might
arise in State courts involving national questions or questions touching
the faithful observance and discharge of the international obligations
of the United States from such State tribunal to the Federal judiciary.
I am urged to repeat at this time this recommendation by the receipt of
intelligence, upon which I can rely, that a subject of Great Britain
residing in Upper Canada has been arrested upon a charge of connection
with the expedition fitted out by the Canadian authorities by which the
_Caroline_ was destroyed, and will in all probability be subjected to
trial in the State courts of New York. It is doubtful whether in this
state of things, should his discharge be demanded by the British
Government, this Government is invested with any control over the
subject until the case shall have reached the court of final resort of
the State of New York and been decided in that court; and although such
delay ought not, in a national point of view to give cause of umbrage
to Great Britain, yet the prompt and instant rendering of justice to
foreign nations should be placed among our highest duties. I can not,
therefore, in consideration of what properly becomes the United States,
and in anticipation of any demand from a foreign government for the
discharge of one of its subjects, forego the duty of repeating my
recommendation to Congress for the immediate Adoption of some suitable
legislative provision on this subject.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _March 11, 1842_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

In compliance with a resolution of the House of Representatives of the
23d ultimo, I communicate to that body a report from the Secretary of
State, conveying copies of the correspondence[26] which contains the
information called for by said resolution.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 26: Relating to complaints of Spain and Portugal that the
operation of the revenue act of September 11, 1841, infringed treaty
stipulations.]



WASHINGTON, _March 12, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I have reason to think that the rejection of Silas Reed as
surveyor-general of Illinois and Missouri on the evening of the last day
of the session of the Senate at the last session of Congress was founded
in a misapprehension of facts, which, while it deprived the public of
the services of a useful officer, left him to suffer a considerable
degree of injustice in his reputation. After mature reflection upon all
the circumstances of his case, and particularly of facts which have
become known since his rejection, I have felt it my duty to submit his
nomination for the same office anew to the Senate for its advice and
consent.

I therefore nominate Silas Reed to be surveyor-general of Illinois and
Missouri, in place of Joseph C. Brown, removed.

JOHN TYLER.



MARCH 15, 1842.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I take the earliest moment to correct an error into which I
inadvertently fell in my message of the 12th instant, nominating Silas
Reed to be surveyor-general for Illinois and Missouri. In that message I
represent the nominee as being rejected by the Senate on the evening of
the last day of the last session of Congress, when upon a more accurate
inquiry I find that he was rejected on the 14th of August, 1841, and
his successor nominated on the 23d August and confirmed on the 13th
September, which was the last day of the last session of Congress, and
which fact had become identified in my memory, upon which I drew when
I wrote the message, with the fact of his rejection.

I hasten to make the correction, not deeming it, however, of much moment
in regard to the real merits of the nomination; for whether the
rejection occurred on the last or any other day of the session, if done
under a misapprehension or mistake of the facts, the Senate, I doubt
not, will take equal pleasure in correcting the error.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _March 17, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In answer to the resolution of the Senate of the 2d ultimo, requesting
information in regard to the demarcation of the boundary line between
the United States and the Republic of Texas, I transmit a report from
the Secretary of State and the papers by which it was accompanied.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _March 17, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I have the honor to submit the accompanying report and documents[27] from
the Postmaster-General, in compliance with the resolution of the Senate
of the 16th February.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 27: Statements of the quantity and cost of labor and materials
for the new public buildings in Washington, D.C., etc.]



WASHINGTON, _March 23, 1842_.

_To the House of Representatives of the United States_:

A resolution adopted by the House of Representatives on the 16th
instant, in the following words, viz, "_Resolved_, That the President of
the United States and the heads of the several Departments be requested
to communicate to the House of Representatives the names of such of the
members (if any) of the Twenty-sixth and Twenty-seventh Congresses who
have been applicants for office, and for what offices, distinguishing
between those who have applied in person and those whose applications
were made by friends, whether in person or by writing," has been
transmitted to me for my consideration.

If it were consistent with the rights and duties of the executive
department, it would afford me great pleasure to furnish in this, as in
all cases in which proper information is demanded, a ready compliance
with the wishes of the House of Representatives. But since, in my view,
general considerations of policy and propriety, as well as a proper
defense of the rights and safeguards of the executive department,
require of me as the Chief Magistrate to refuse compliance with the
terms of this resolution, it is incumbent on me to urge, for the
consideration of the House of Representatives, my reasons for declining
to give the desired information.

All appointments to office made by a President become from the date of
their nomination to the Senate official acts, which are matter of record
and are at the proper time made known to the House of Representatives
and to the country. But applications for office, or letters respecting
appointments, or conversations held with individuals on such subjects
are not official proceedings, and can not by any means be made to
partake of the character of official proceedings unless after the
nomination of such person so writing or conversing the President shall
think proper to lay such correspondence or such conversations before the
Senate. Applications for office are in their very nature confidential,
and if the reasons assigned for such applications or the names of the
applicants were communicated, not only would such implied confidence be
wantonly violated, but, in addition, it is quite obvious that a mass of
vague, incoherent, and personal matter would be made public at a vast
consumption of time, money, and trouble without accomplishing or tending
in any manner to accomplish, as it appears to me, any useful object
connected with a sound and constitutional administration of the
Government in any of its branches.

But there is a consideration of a still more effective and lofty
character which is with me entirely decisive of the correctness of the
view that I have taken of this question. While I shall ever evince the
greatest readiness to communicate to the House of Representatives all
proper information which the House shall deem necessary to a due
discharge of its constitutional obligations and functions, yet it
becomes me, in defense of the Constitution and laws of the United
States, to protect the executive department from all encroachment on
its powers, rights, and duties. In my judgment a compliance with the
resolution which has been transmitted to me would be a surrender of
duties and powers which the Constitution has conferred exclusively on
the Executive, and therefore such compliance can not be made by me nor
by the heads of Departments by my direction. The appointing power, so
far as it is bestowed on the President by the Constitution, is conferred
without reserve or qualification. The reason for the appointment and
the responsibility of the appointment rest with him alone. I can not
perceive anywhere in the Constitution of the United States any right
conferred on the House of Representatives to hear the reasons which an
applicant may urge for an appointment to office under the executive
department, or any duty resting upon the House of Representatives by
which it may become responsible for any such appointment.

Any assumption or misapprehension on the part of the House of
Representatives of its duties and powers in respect to appointments by
which it encroaches on the rights and duties of the executive department
is to the extent to which it reaches dangerous, impolitic, and
unconstitutional.

For these reasons, so perfectly convincing to my mind, I beg leave
respectfully to repeat, in conclusion, that I can not comply with the
request contained in the above resolution.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _March 25, 1842_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States_:

Notwithstanding the urgency with which I have on more than one occasion
felt it my duty to press upon Congress the necessity of providing the
Government with the means of discharging its debts and maintaining
inviolate the public faith, the increasing embarrassments of the
Treasury impose upon me the indispensable obligation of again inviting
your most serious attention to the condition of the finances.
Fortunately for myself in thus bringing this important subject to your
view for a deliberate and comprehensive examination in all its bearings,
and I trust I may add for a final adjustment of it to the common
advantage of the whole Union, I am permitted to approach it with perfect
freedom and candor. As few of the burdens for which provision is now
required to be made have been brought upon the country during my short
administration of its affairs, I have neither motive nor wish to make
them a matter of crimination against any of my predecessors. I am
disposed to regard, as I am bound to treat, them _as facts_ which can
not now be undone, and as deeply interesting to us all, and equally
imposing upon all the most solemn duties; and the only use I would make
of the errors of the past is by a careful examination of their causes
and character to avoid if possible the repetition of them in future.
The condition of the country, indeed, is such as may well arrest the
conflict of parties.

The conviction seems at length to have made its way to the minds of all
that the disproportion between the public responsibilities and the means
provided for meeting them is no casual nor transient evil. It is, on the
contrary, one which for some years to come, notwithstanding a resort to
all reasonable retrenchments and the constant progress of the country
in population and productive power, must continue to increase under
existing laws, unless we consent to give up or impair all our defenses
in war and peace. But this is a thought which I am persuaded no
patriotic mind would for a moment entertain. Without affecting an alarm,
which I do not feel, in regard to our foreign relations, it may safely
be affirmed that they are in a state too critical and involve too many
momentous issues to permit us to neglect in the least, much less to
abandon entirely, those means of asserting our rights without which
negotiation is without dignity and peace without security.

In the report of the Secretary of the Treasury submitted to Congress
at the commencement of the present session it is estimated that after
exhausting all the probable resources of the year there will remain a
deficit of about $14,000,000. With a view partly to a permanent system
of revenue and partly to immediate relief from actual embarrassment,
that officer recommended, together with a plan for establishing a
Government exchequer, some expedients of a more temporary character,
viz, the issuing of Treasury notes and the extension of the time for
which the loan authorized to be negotiated by the act of the last
session should be taken. Congress accordingly provided for an issue of
Treasury notes to the amount of $5,000,000, but subject to the condition
that they should not be paid away below par.

No measure connected with the last of the two objects above mentioned
was introduced until recently into the House of Representatives. Should
the loan bill now pending before that body pass into a law for its
present amount, there would still remain a deficit of $2,500,000. It
requires no argument to show that such a condition of the Treasury is
incompatible not only with a high state of public credit, but with
anything approaching to efficiency in the conduct of public affairs.
It must be obvious even to the most inexperienced minds that, to say
nothing of any particular exigency, actual or imminent, there should
be at all times in the Treasury of a great nation, with a view to
contingencies of ordinary occurrence, a surplus at least equal in amount
to the above deficiency. But that deficiency, serious as it would be in
itself, will, I am compelled to say, rather be increased than diminished
without the adoption of measures adequate to correct the evil at once.
The stagnation of trade and business, in some degree incident to the
derangement of the national finances and the state of the revenue laws,
holds out but little prospect of relief, in the ordinary course of
things, for some time to come.

Under such circumstances I am deeply impressed with the necessity of
meeting the crisis with a vigor and decision which it imperatively
demands at the hands of all intrusted with the conduct of public
affairs. The gravity of the evil calls for a remedy proportioned to it.
No slight palliatives or occasional expedients will give the country the
relief it needs. Such measures, on the contrary, will in the end, as is
now manifest to all, too surely multiply its embarrassments. Relying,
as I am bound to do, on the representatives of a people rendered
illustrious among nations by having paid off its whole public debt,
I shall not shrink from the responsibility imposed upon me by the
Constitution of pointing out such measures as will in my opinion insure
adequate relief. I am the more encouraged to recommend the course which
necessity exacts by the confidence which I have in its complete success.
The resources of the country in everything that constitutes the wealth
and strength of nations are so abundant, the spirit of a most
industrious, enterprising, and intelligent people is so energetic and
elastic, that the Government will be without the shadow of excuse for
its delinquency if the difficulties which now embarrass it be not
speedily and effectually removed.

From present indications it is hardly doubtful that Congress will find
it necessary to lay additional duties on imports in order to meet the
ordinary current expenses of the Government. In the exercise of a sound
discrimination having reference to revenue, but at the same time
necessarily affording incidental protection to manufacturing industry,
it seems equally probable that duties on some articles of importation
will have to be advanced above 20 per cent. In performing this important
work of revising the tariff of duties, which in the present emergency
would seem to be indispensable, I can not too strongly recommend the
cultivation of a spirit of mutual harmony and concession, to which the
Government itself owes its origin, and without the continued exercise of
which jarring and discord would universally prevail.

An additional reason for the increase of duties in some instances beyond
the rate of 20 per cent will exist in fulfilling the recommendations
already made, and now repeated, of making adequate appropriations for
the defenses of the country.

By the express provision of the act distributing the proceeds of the
sales of the public lands among the States its operation is _ipso facto_
to cease so soon as the rate of the duties shall exceed the limits
prescribed in the act.

In recommending the adoption of measures for distributing the proceeds
of the public lands among the States at the commencement of the last
session of Congress such distribution was urged by arguments and
considerations which appeared to me then and appear to me now of great
weight, and was placed on the condition that it should not render
necessary any departure from the act of 1833. It is with sincere regret
that I now perceive the necessity of departing from that act, because I
am well aware that expectations justly entertained by some of the States
will be disappointed by any occasion which shall withhold from them the
proceeds of the lands. But the condition was plainly expressed in the
message and was inserted in terms equally plain in the law itself, and
amidst the embarrassments which surround the country on all sides and
beset both the General and the State Governments it appears to me that
the object first and highest in importance is to establish the credit of
this Government and to place it on durable foundations, and thus afford
the most effectual support to the credit of the States, equal at least
to what it would receive from a direct distribution of the proceeds of
the sales of the public lands.

When the distribution law was passed there was reason to anticipate that
there soon would be a real surplus to distribute. On that assumption
it was in my opinion a wise, a just, and a beneficent measure. But to
continue it in force while there is no such surplus to distribute and
when it is manifestly necessary not only to increase the duties, but at
the same time to borrow money in order to liquidate the public debt and
disembarrass the public Treasury, would cause it to be regarded as an
unwise alienation of the best security of the public creditor, which
would with difficulty be excused and could not be justified.

Causes of no ordinary character have recently depressed American credit
in the stock market of the world to a degree quite unprecedented. I need
scarcely mention the condition of the banking institutions of some of
the States, the vast amount of foreign debt contracted during a period
of wild speculation by corporations and individuals, and, above all, the
Doctrine of repudiation of contracts solemnly entered into by States,
which, although as yet applied only under circumstances of a peculiar
character and generally rebuked with severity by the moral sense of the
community, is yet so very licentious and, in a Government depending
wholly on opinion, so very alarming that the impression made by it to
our disadvantage as a people is anything but surprising. Under such
circumstances it is imperatively due from us to the people whom we
represent that when we go into the money market to contract a loan we
should tender such securities as to cause the money lender, as well at
home as abroad, to feel that the most propitious opportunity is afforded
him of investing profitably and judiciously his capital. A government
which has paid off the debts of two wars, waged with the most powerful
nation of modern times, should not be brought to the necessity of
chaffering for terms in the money market. Under such circumstances as I
have adverted to our object should be to produce with the capitalist a
feeling of entire confidence, by a tender of that sort of security which
in all times past has been esteemed sufficient, and which for the small
amount of our proposed indebtedness will unhesitatingly be regarded as
amply adequate. While a pledge of all the revenues amounts to no more
than is implied in every instance when the Government contracts a
debt, and although it ought in ordinary circumstances to be entirely
satisfactory, yet in times like these the capitalist would feel better
satisfied with the pledge of a specific fund, ample in magnitude to the
payment of his interest and ultimate reimbursement of his principal.
Such is the character of the land fund. The most vigilant money dealer
will readily perceive that not only will his interest be secure on
such a pledge, but that a debt of $18,000,000 or $20,000,000 would by
the surplus of sales over and above the payment of the interest be
extinguished within any reasonable time fixed for its redemption.
To relieve the Treasury from its embarrassments and to aid in meeting
its requisitions until time is allowed for any new tariff of duties
to become available, it would seem to be necessary to fund a debt
approaching to $15,000,000; and in order to place the negotiation of the
loan beyond a reasonable doubt I submit to Congress whether the proceeds
of the sales of the public lands should not be pledged for the payment
of the interest, and the Secretary of the Treasury be authorized out of
the surplus of the proceeds of such sales to purchase the stock, when it
can be procured on such terms as will render it beneficial in that way,
to extinguish the debt and prevent the accumulation of such surplus
while its distribution is suspended.

No one can doubt that were the Federal Treasury now as prosperous as it
was ten years ago and its fiscal operations conducted by an efficient
agency of its own, coextensive with the Union, the embarrassments of the
States and corporations in them would produce, even if they continued as
they are (were that possible), effects far less disastrous than those
now experienced. It is the disorder here, at the heart and center of the
system, that paralyzes and deranges every part of it. Who does not know
the permanent importance, not to the Federal Government alone, but to
every State and every individual within its jurisdiction, even in their
most independent and isolated individual pursuits, of the preservation
of a sound state of public opinion and a judicious administration here?
The sympathy is instantaneous and universal. To attempt to remedy the
evil of the deranged credit and currency of the States while the disease
is allowed to rage in the vitals of this Government would be a hopeless
undertaking.

It is the full conviction of this truth which emboldens me most
earnestly to recommend to your early and serious consideration the
measures now submitted to your better judgment, as well as those to
which your attention has been already invited. The first great want of
the country, that without answering which all attempts at bettering
the present condition of things will prove fruitless, is a complete
restoration of the credit and finances of the Federal Government.
The source and foundation of all credit is in the confidence which the
Government inspires, and just in proportion as that confidence shall
be shaken or diminished will be the distrust among all classes of the
community and the derangement and demoralization in every branch of
business and all the interests of the country. Keep up the standard of
good faith and punctuality in the operations of the General Government,
and all partial irregularities and disorders will be rectified by
the influence of its example; but suffer that standard to be debased
or disturbed, and it is impossible to foresee to what a degree of
degradation and confusion all financial interests, public and private,
may sink. In such a country as this the representatives of the people
have only to will it, and the public credit will be as high as it ever
was.

My own views of the measures calculated to effect this great and
desirable object I have thus frankly expressed to Congress under
circumstances which give to the entire subject a peculiar and solemn
interest. The Executive can do no more. If the credit of the country be
exposed to question, if the public defenses be broken down or weakened,
if the whole administration of public affairs be embarrassed for want of
the necessary means for conducting them with vigor and effect, I trust
that this department of the Government will be found to have done all
that was in its power to avert such evils, and will be acquitted of all
just blame on account of them.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _March 25, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I have the honor herewith to submit a report[28] from the Secretary of
the Navy, in compliance with your resolution of the 18th February, 1842.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 28: Transmitting list of agents, etc., employed by the Navy
Department without express authority of law, etc.]



WASHINGTON, _March 30, 1842_.

_To the House of Representatives of the United States_:

I transmit to the House of Representatives two extracts from a note
of the charge d'affaires of the Republic of Texas accredited to this
Government to the Department of State, one suggesting in behalf of his
Government such modifications of the existing laws of the United States
as will impart greater facility to the trade between the two countries,
particularly to that which passes across their frontier, and the other
expressing a desire for some regulation on the part of this Government
by means of which the communication by post between the United States
and Texas may be improved.

As the wishes of the Texan Government in relation to those subjects can
only be gratified by means of laws to be passed by Congress, they are
accordingly referred to the consideration of the two Houses.

JOHN TYLER.

[The same message was sent to the Senate.]



WASHINGTON, _April 1, 1842_.

_To the Senate_:

In part compliance with a resolution of the Senate of the 20th of July,
1841, I transmit herewith a report[29] from the Department of War.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 29: Transmitting list of removals from and appointments to
office in the Department of War from March 4, 1829, to September 30,
1841.]



WASHINGTON, _April 1, 1842_.

_To the House of Representatives of the United States_:

In compliance with your resolution of the 21st of March, I have the
honor to submit the accompanying communication[30] from the Secretary
of the Navy.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 30: Relating to appointments to office in the Navy and Marine
Corps since April 4, 1841.]



WASHINGTON, _April 4, 1842_.

_To the House of Representatives of the United States_.

In part compliance with a resolution of the House of Representatives
of the 21st March, 1842, I herewith communicate a report[31] from the
Secretary of State.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 31: Transmitting list of appointments by the President or
Secretary of State since April 4, 1841.]



WASHINGTON, _April 7, 1842_.

_To the House of Representatives of the United States_:

I herewith transmit to the House of Representatives copies of a letter
addressed to the Secretary of State by the chairman of the board of
commissioners appointed to explore and survey the boundary line between
the States of Maine and New Hampshire and the adjoining British
Provinces, together with the report of the operations of that commission
to the 31st ultimo, and a profile of the meridian line from the source
of the St. Croix River as far as surveyed, illustrative of the report.

JOHN TYLER.

[The same message was sent to the Senate.]



DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

_Washington, March 31, 1842_.

Hon. DANIEL WEBSTER,

_Secretary of State_.

SIR: By directions of the board of commissioners for exploring and
surveying the northeastern boundary, I have handed you the papers
hereinafter specified, viz:

1. The report of the operations of the commission up to the present
date.

2. A profile of the meridian line of the source of the St. Croix as far
as surveyed, intended to illustrate the report.

3. A portfolio of drawings intended for the same purpose.

4. A roll marked Appendix No. 1, containing the narrative of the field
operations of the division of Professor Renwick.

5. A tin case containing the detail of the surveys of the division of
Professor Renwick.

In reply to your inquiry in relation to the disposition of the said
papers, I am directed respectfully to suggest that all which it is
absolutely necessary to lay before Congress are the items 1 and 2,
which, with a general map now in preparation, will contain all that will
be of any general public interest.

The portfolio (No. 3) and the box of maps and profiles (No. 5) should
remain on file in the Department; and while a part of the drawings in
the former may be useful for illustration, the latter will be superseded
by the general map, in which will be embodied all that they contain of
importance to the question at issue.

Appendix No. 1, specified as No. 4 in the above list, will probably be
demanded hereafter to give authenticity to the conclusions of the report
(No. 1). It ought not, however, to be communicated until the Appendices
Nos. 2 and 3, containing the operations of the divisions of Messrs.
Graham and Talcott, are handed in; and of the three no more than a
limited number of copies will be useful.

I have the honor to be, with much respect, your most obedient servant,

JAS. RENWICK,
  _Chairman_.




_Report of the commissioners appointed by the President of the United
States for the purpose of surveying and exploring the boundary line
between the States of Maine and New Hampshire and the British
Provinces_.

WASHINGTON, _March 28,1842_.

Hon. DANIEL WEBSTER,

_Secretary of State_.

SIR: The duties assigned to the undersigned by the instructions of your
predecessor were twofold:

First. To explore and survey the lines respectively claimed by the
Governments of the United States and Great Britain.

Second. To examine and report upon the arguments contained in the report
of Messrs. Featherstonhaugh and Mudge addressed to the secretary of
state of Her Britannic Majesty for foreign affairs under date of 16th
April, 1840.

I.

In order to the more exact and successful performance of the duties
included under the first of the above heads, the boundary line was
divided by their instructions into three separate portions, one of
which was assigned to each of the commissioners; and while they were
instructed to assemble in a board for the purpose of comparing their
respective surveys, in view of the performance of the duties included
in the second of the above divisions their explorations have been
separately conducted. Each of the commissioners has employed the methods
and course of action most appropriate in his opinion to the successful
fulfillment of his appointed task, and the nature of the surveys
assigned to one of them has been of a character widely different from
those of his colleagues. The commissioners, therefore, while uniting in
a general report of the progress made up to this time in the duties of
their appointment, beg leave to submit, in the form of appendices, the
narrative of their several operations, with so much of the records
of their observations and calculations as they have severally judged
necessary to authenticate the conclusions at which they have arrived.

The progress which has been made in the labors of the commissioners
enables them at this time to lay before you--

1. A description of the physical features of the disputed territory.

2. A comparison of the heights of the line claimed by the United States
with those of the line styled the "axis of maximum elevation" by Messrs.
Featherstonhaugh and Mudge. In laying the latter before you they have,
in order to avoid delay, made use in part of the published results
obtained by those gentlemen, and although they have already detected
errors in their inferences they do not consider that by accepting them
for the moment as the basis of comparison they can be accused of
exhibiting the line claimed by Great Britain in an unfavorable light.


I.--DESCRIPTION OF THE DISPUTED TERRITORY.

The seacoast of the State of Maine is rugged and hilly. The primitive
rocks of which its geological structure is chiefly composed are broken
into ridges which run parallel to the great streams, and therefore in a
direction from north to south. These ridges terminate in an irregular
line, which to the east of the Penobscot may be identified nearly with
the military road to Houlton. From the northern summit of these ridges
an extensive view of the disputed territory can in many places be
obtained. This is the case at the military post at Houlton, whence a
wide extent of country may be seen. A still more perfect view may be
obtained from the summit of Parks Hill, at a point about 400 yards south
of the road from Houlton to Woodstock and about half a mile east of the
exploring meridian line. At the time when that line was run by the
British and American surveyors, under the fifth article of the treaty of
Ghent, the top of this hill was covered with wood, and they were obliged
to content themselves with the view from Park's barn, which is at least
200 feet beneath the summit. At the present moment the latter is
cleared, and the view from west-southwest to northeast is unimpeded
except by a single clump of trees, which cuts off the view for a few
degrees in the northwest direction; but by a change of position every
part of the horizon between these points is to be seen. Toward the west
are seen ridges parallel to the Penobscot, over which Katahdin towers to
a great height, bearing by compass N. 85 deg. W. In a direction N. 75 deg. W.
are seen two distant peaks, one of which was identified as the
Traveller. All of these eminences lie south of the line claimed by Great
Britain. In the north-northwest direction there appear two ridges of
comparatively small elevation, which were pointed out as the Aroostook
Mountains, but have since been ascertained to lie near the sources of
the Meduxnikeag. These lie in the line claimed by Great Britain in 1817.

Between these and the other mountains there is evidently no connection,
and the rest of the country, as seen from the hill, bears the aspect
of a wooded plain. It will be sufficient to refer to this view to be
satisfied that all the impressions which have been circulated of a
continuous chain of elevations extending along the line claimed by
Great Britain are utterly fallacious.

Toward the north the country exhibits the same general features. One
vast and apparently unbroken plain extends to the utmost limits of the
visible horizon. In the midst of this, and at a distance of nearly 30
miles, Mars Hill alone breaks the monotonous prospect, and from its
isolated position assumes to the eye an importance to which its altitude
of less than 1,800 feet would not otherwise entitle it. No other
eminences are to be seen in this direction, except a round peak bearing
a few degrees west of north and some distant ridges about an equal
distance to the east. The first of these has been ascertained by the
surveys of Major Graham to be an isolated hill near the peak known as
Quaquajo. The eastern ridges are probably those measured between the
Tobique and the Bay of Chaleurs by the British commissioners. A sketch
of this view from Parks Hill is annexed to the report, and lest any
doubt be entertained of its accuracy it is proper to state that the
unassisted vision was not relied upon, but that the outlines were
carefully delineated by means of the camera lucida.

From this view it might be inferred that the northern part of the
admitted possessions of the United States to the east of the Penobscot
and the disputed territory as far as visible constitute a vast
table-land slightly inclined toward the southeast.

On descending into the valley of the St. John the appearances change.
The tableland is cut to a great depth by that stream, and from its bed
the broken edges of the great plain look like ridges whose height is
exaggerated to the senses in consequence of their being densely clothed
with wood. The same is the case with all the branches of this river,
which also cut the table-land to greater or less depths according to
their distance from the stream into which they discharge themselves.

The want of a true highland or mountainous character in this region is
obvious from the aspect it presents in the two different points of view.
Mountainous regions are most imposing when seen from a distance and from
heights. On a nearer approach, and from the valleys which intersect
them, the elevations, so important in the distant view, are hidden
by their own slopes or lose the appearance of relative elevation in
consequence of the absolute heights of the valleys themselves. In
conformity with this character, the line claimed by the United States
for the most part presents, when seen at a distance, the appearance of
lofty and deeply serrated ridges, while to one who traverses it it is a
labyrinth of lakes, morasses, and short but steep elevations which hide
its peaks from the valleys and streams.

The line claimed by Great Britain, on the other hand, when seen from
a distance is as level as the surface of the ocean, with no greater
appearance of elevation and depression than would represent its billows;
while, seen from its own valleys, the heights assume an importance which
their elevation above the valleys when actually measured does not
warrant. The characteristics of the region through which the line of
Messrs. Mudge and Featherstonhaugh passes are therefore the opposite of
those usually remarked in highland countries, while those of the line
claimed by the United States are the same as are always observed in
such regions.

This character of a table-land deeply cut by streams is well exhibited
in the section of their "axis of maximum elevation" by the British
commissioners. In that will be seen the mountains near the source of the
Aroostook, Alleguash, and Penobscot on the one hand, and of the Tobique
on the other, while the intervening space is occupied by a curve
resembling an inverted arch, of which the St. John occupies the
keystone. In a country of this character any line whatever would present
the appearance of a succession of eminences, and might by as liberal a
construction of the term as has been made by Messrs. Mudge and
Featherstonhaugh be called highlands.

The sameness of this general character is broken only by a single chain
of hills.[32] This is a prolongation of Mars Hill toward the north, and,
being both of less height and breadth than that mountain, is hidden by
it from the view of a spectator on Parks Hill. Mars Hill is itself an
isolated eminence, and is in fact nearly an island, for the Presque Isle
and Gissiguit rivers, running the one to the north and the other to the
south of it, have branches which take their rise in the same swamp on
its northwestern side. To the north of the Des Chutes the ground again
rises, and although cut by several streams, and particularly by the
Aroostook, the chain is prolonged by isolated eminences as far as the
White Rapids, below the Grand Falls of the St. John, where it crosses
that river. It may thence be traced in a northern direction to the Sugar
Loaf Mountain, on the Wagansis portage, where it terminates.

[Footnote 32: A chain is made up of mountains whose bases touch each
other.--BALBI.]

To this broken chain belongs the elevation of 918 feet given by Messrs.
Mudge and Featherstonhaugh to an eminence in the neighborhood of the
Aroostook Falls. An accurate profile of so many of these eminences as
fall in the line of the connected meridian is herewith submitted. This
chain of eminences is not prolonged to the westward, as it is entirely
unconnected with any other height aspiring to the name of mountain in
that direction.

It is not in any sense a dividing ridge, being cut by all the streams in
the country, and in particular to a great depth by the St. John and the
Aroostook.

A section of this line was given in a report to the British commissioner
under the fifth article of the treaty of Ghent by Colonel Bouchette, the
surveyor-general of the Province of Canada. His heights were determined
by the barometer, and estimated from the assumed level of the monument
at the source of the St. Croix.

It would now appear that the section of Colonel Bouchette is very
inaccurate, and that the heights as reported by him are not only much
beyond the truth, but that the continually ascending slope ascribed by
him to the country from the monument at the source of the St. Croix to
the point where the due north line crosses the St. John is entirely
erroneous. He, however, adroitly availed himself of this inaccurate
section to attempt to prove the existence of a continuous chain of
mountains from Katahdin to the Great Falls of the St. John, and thence
around the southwestern branches of the Restigouche until it met the
heights rising from the north shore of the Bay of Chaleurs. For this
reason his view taken from Park's barn and that made by Mr. Odell from
the same point were urged for admission as evidence on oath by the
British agent, and the map of Mr. Johnson, which contradicted this
evidence, was carefully excluded. It can not be concealed that could
Colonel Bouchette's idea founded on erroneous premises have been
established by indisputable facts it would have been the most fatal
argument that has ever been adduced against the American claim, for he
would have argued that the meridian line of the St. Croix would at Mars
Hill have first intersected highlands which, rising from the north shore
of the Bay of Chaleurs, would have appeared to divide until within a few
miles of the Grand Falls of the St. John waters which fall into the St.
Lawrence from those which fall into the Atlantic, and would have been
the south boundary of the Province of Quebec.

Mars Hill would then have appeared to be in truth as well as in claim
the northwest angle of the Province of Nova Scotia; and although the
rest of the line would not have fulfilled the conditions, the United
States might by an arbitrator have been compelled to accept this point
as the beginning of their boundary. Nor, in the unexplored state of the
country, is it by any means certain that the American agent, who does
not seem to have seen the drift of the proceedings of Colonel Bouchette,
would have been prepared with the adverse facts, which are now known to
be undeniable. It may therefore be considered fortunate for the claim of
the United States that the survey was afterwards intrusted to a surveyor
who, in pursuit of the double object of encroachment on the United
States and the enlargement of his native Province at the expense of
Canada, signally failed in the proof of either of his positions.

The knowledge now acquired shows that the idea of Colonel Bouchette is
unsupported by the facts of the case, for the highlands which rise from
the north shore of the Bay of Chaleurs do not meet those in which the
most southerly branch of the Restigouche takes its rise.

The British commissioners, although they give a profile of this ridge,
do not pretend to have examined it except at Mars Hill, near the
Aroostook, and at the Grand Falls of the St. John. It must be remarked
that these profiles (the original one of Colonel Bouchette and that
exhibited by themselves) are contrasted--one British authority with
another--for the purpose of invalidating the ground on which the
American claim is founded.

It is not our business to reconcile these conflicting authorities, but
it is our duty to recall the recollections of the fact that no part
of the American argument laid before the King of the Netherlands was
founded on this or any other estimate of heights. Many elevations,
indeed, were measured with great pains on the part of the Americans
as well as of Great Britain.

On behalf of the United States Captain Partridge made many barometric
observations, while Mr. Johnson took an extensive series of vertical
and horizontal angles. His operations were performed in the presence of
Mr. Odell, the surveyor on behalf of Great Britain, who doubtless made
similar ones, as he visited the same stations with a better instrument
and for the same avowed purpose. Mr. Odell's observations were not
presented by the British agent, and those of Mr. Johnson were objected
to. If received, they would have set aside the pretensions that a
continuous ridge of mountains existed between the Metjarmette portage
and Mars Hill. They are, however, superseded by the operations of the
undersigned, which have yielded satisfactory evidence that no chain of
highlands in the sense of the British commissioners, or even an "axis of
maximum elevation," exists where it is laid down on their map. Nor can
it be doubted that the operations of Mr. Johnson had a decided advantage
in point of probable accuracy over theirs. The exploring meridian line
used as a base was measured with a tolerable degree of accuracy, and
from the three heights chosen by him the whole country is visible.

On the other hand, the course of Messrs. Mudge and Featherstonhaugh
being confined, except where they ascended Mars Hill, to the valleys of
the streams, they were for the most part excluded from a prospect. In
describing the view from Mars Hill, however, they have pictured in most
accurate terms the true features of the country:

"The character of the country may be well discerned and understood from
this insulated hill. It presents to the eye one mass of dark and gloomy
forest to the utmost limits of sight, covering by its umbrageous mantle
the principal rivers, minor streams, and scanty vestiges of the
habitation of man."

This description can only agree with that of a vast table-land into
which the streams cut so deep and form such narrow valleys as to be
invisible.

But if a chain of highlands, or even an "axis of maximum elevation,"
had existed as they lay it down, within 20 miles, it would have been
visible, and it need not be said that they would not have failed to
describe it. The inconsistency between their map and this true and
forcible description of the features of the country is apparent.

The same general character of table-land is found to the north of the
St. John above the Grand Falls. Its first important northern tributary
is the Grand River. In ascending this stream the level of the table-land
is soon reached. The river runs between banks of very moderate elevation
and on a regular slope, and although running with great rapidity upon a
pebbly bed it is yet so tortuous that while its distance from its mouth
to the Wagansis portage in a straight line is no more than 13 miles the
meanders of its channel amount to 30.

On the Wagansis portage the table-land is terminated by a ridge whose
summit is elevated 264 feet above the wagansis[33] of Grand River. It
was at first believed that this, although of small elevation, was a
dividing ridge, and that it might correspond to one construction which
has, although inaccurately, been put on the treaty of 1783. This belief
was speedily removed, for the rivulet on its northern side was found to
be cut off from the Restigouche by the Sugar Loaf Mountain, and is
therefore a branch either of the Grand River or of the stream which
falls into the St. John immediately above the Grand Falls. The height of
land which divides this rivulet from the wagan of the Restigouche is not
elevated above the former more than 117 feet. There is, in fact, at this
place a gap 5 or 6 miles in breadth in the great system of mountains
which extend from the Gulf of St. Lawrence at the Bay des Chaleurs to
the river St. Lawrence near the Temiscouata portage. At the northern
verge of the table-land which has been described, and near the mouth of
Green River, rises to the height of about 1,600 feet a mountain known
from the name of that stream. This is, like Mars Hill, isolated, and
affords an extensive view. To the north and west the prospect is bounded
by a continuous line of horizon, which, instead of being obviously below
the level of the eye, as in the view of the disputed territory from Mars
Hill, is evidently of even greater height than the Green River Mountain
itself.

[Footnote 33: Wagan is a term in the Abenaki language signifying way.
Sis is a diminutive particle. Wagansis is therefore the little way; and
it seems probable that the name of Grand River, the usual epithet for
the St. John, has been improperly applied to the small stream which
bears it on the map.]

On entering into this region from the south by any of the navigable
streams which traverse it, it presents a more decidedly mountainous
character than the country to the south. The Grande Fourche of
Restigouche is bordered by two continuous chains of mountains, rising
when it first issues from them to the height of a thousand feet above
its surface. The stream having a rapid fall, the relative elevation
becomes less until, in the neighborhood of the lake in which its north
branch first collects its waters, the relative elevation is not more
than four or five hundred feet.

On traversing this elevated country it presents a different aspect from
what is seen either from a distance or where it is entered from the
rivers. Frequent ridges are crossed; the tops of these are often
occupied by swamps filled with a thick growth of cedars. Deep and small
basins occur, which are occupied by lakes that give rise to rivers
flowing to the St. Lawrence or to the St. John. These are intermingled
with thickets of dwarf spruce, and the streams are sometimes bordered
by marshes covered by low alders, and sometimes cut deep into rocky
channels. In this apparent labyrinth one positive circumstance marks the
line of division, or the true height of land: The streams which run to
the St. John are all of the first description--sluggish--while those
which discharge themselves into the St. Lawrence are rapid, and have the
character of torrents.

On the western side of the disputed territory are ridges of rocky
hills running nearly north and south, and thus tending toward the
St. Lawrence, which they in some places reach and shut out the view
of the interior.

It thus becomes difficult to find a station whence the heights of land
can be viewed and its character exhibited. It has therefore been
hitherto possible for those who have argued in support of the claims
of Great Britain to represent without meeting with contradiction that
the streams which fall into the St. John had their rise in a country
possessed of none of that mountainous character which they urged was
essential to the epithet of highlands. There are, however, points where
a different character is apparent, and some of these are easy of access.
Thus, on the main mail road, along the Southeast Branch of the St.
Lawrence a mile northeast of the church of L'Islette, a rocky eminence
is passed, whence may be seen a bold group of mountains which have been
identified with the sources of the Ouelle, the Kamouraska, and Black
rivers. A view of this group is herewith presented.

From the height to the east of river Du Loup a view may be seen on a
clear day extending round 137 deg. of the horizon, beginning with the
highlands of Bic, bearing N. 58 deg. E., and terminating in a conical
mountain bearing S. 15 deg. W.

The nearest and more conspicuous of these highlands (named those of St.
Andre) are on the river Fourche, a branch of the river Du Loup, whose
waters they divide from those of the St. Francis. A view of these is
also submitted herewith.

A similar view of the same panorama of highlands is obtained from Hare
Island, in the St. Lawrence, an outline of which, taken with the camera
lucida, is likewise submitted. About a quarter of a mile to the south
of the point where the Temiscouata portage crosses Mount Biort the
highlands may be seen at the head of Rimouski, bearing nearly east,
thence extending round by the north to the mountains of St. Andre,
bearing nearly west, forming about one-half of the entire horizon.
The entire panorama from the latter point, taken with the camera
lucida, along with copies of some daguerreotypes made at the same place,
are herewith submitted. Of the part of the line which extends to the
northeast from the source of the Etchemin for a distance of many miles,
a view may be almost constantly seen from the citadel of Quebec and from
the tops of the houses in that city. One still more satisfactory may be
obtained from the road between Quebec and the Falls of Montmorency, in
the neighborhood of the village of Belport. The latter views are in
particular referred to, as they are within the reach of numerous civil
and military officers of the British Government, who must assent to the
evidence of their own senses, which will prove that this region, the
position of the path pursued during the present year by Captain
Talcott's parties, is to all intents a range of highlands.

The boundary presents from these positions the aspect of a continuous
and deeply serrated ridge.

The geological character of the country can not be admitted as having
any bearing upon the subject under consideration. It never entered into
the views of the framers of the treaty of 1783, and therefore could
afford no illustrations of their intentions.

Were it admissible, however, it might be cited as an additional argument
that the dividing height which incloses the waters of the Connecticut
continues unchanged in its features until it is cut off by the deep
channel of the St. Lawrence.

Opportunities for observations of this character were most frequent on
the Temiscouata portage and on the banks of the St. Lawrence itself. It
was only on the former place that the relative geological heights of the
rocks could be observed by means of their outcrop.

The whole of the portage passes over stratified rocks dipping rapidly to
the southeast. They were found to be alternate groups of common and
talcose slate and of a rock made up principally of angular fragments of
white quartz (grauwacke). These are in all respects identical with rocks
which have been observed by one of the commissioners in place in
Berkshire County, Mass., and in Columbia and Rensselaer counties, N.Y.,
and the description of geologists at various intervening points, as well
as the observations of Captain Talcott's parties, would tend to
establish the fact that the formations are continuous.

From these data it would appear probable that the rocks are a
prolongation of the western slope of the great range called by Mr.
Featherstonhaugh, in his report as United States geologist, the Atlantic
ridge. This formation, which is but a few miles in width where it
crosses the Hudson, appears gradually to widen as it proceeds to the
north, and was on the St. Lawrence found to prevail both at the river
Du Loup and at Grand Metis, dipping in the two places in opposite
directions and covered in the interval by the thick diluvial deposits
which form the valley of the Trois Pistoles. To render the analogy more
complete, in the valley of the outlet of the Little Lake (Temiscouata)
was found a vein of metalliferous quartz charged with peroxide of iron,
evidently arising from the decomposition of pyrites, being in fact the
same as the matrix of the gold which has been traced in the talcose
slate formation from Georgia to Vermont; and on the western shore of the
Temiscouata Lake, about a mile to the south of Fort Ingall, lie great
masses of granular carbonate of lime, identically resembling the white
marbles of Pennsylvania, Westchester County, N.Y., and Berkshire County,
Mass.

If the latter be in place, which, although probable, was not ascertained
beyond all question, the primitive carbonate of lime has exactly the
same relation to the slaty rocks which it bears in the latter locality.

The formations which have been spoken of appear to occupy the whole
extent of the country explored by the parties of Professor Renwick.
Everywhere the streams were found cutting through rocks of slate. On
the summits of many of the hills were found weathered masses of angular
quartz rocks, showing that while the slate had yielded to the action of
the elements, the harder and less friable rock had kept its place. The
ridges which intervene between the St. Lawrence at the river Du Loup
and Lake Temiscouata have the character, so well described by Elie de
Beaumont, of mountains elevated by some internal force.

To the eastward of Lake Temiscouata, on the other hand, the country has
the aspect of having once been a table-land, elevated on the average
about 1,700 feet above the level of the sea, and of having been washed
by some mighty flood, which, wearing away the softer rocks, had cut it
into valleys, forming a complex system incapable of being described in
words and only to be understood by inspection of a map.

2.--COMPARISON OF THE ELEVATIONS OF THE BOUNDARY LINE CLAIMED BY THE
UNITED STATES WITH THOSE OF THE "AXIS OF MAXIMUM ELEVATION" OF MESSRS.
FEATHERSTONHAUGH AND MUDGE.

For the purpose of exhibiting the relative claims of the two lines to
the exclusive epithet of "the highlands" in the most clear and definite
manner, each of them will be considered as divided into three portions,
which will be contrasted with each other by pairs The first portion
of each of the lines is that which lies nearest to the point of
bifurcation, the residue of the American line is divided at the source
of the Ouelle, the remainder of the line of Messrs. Featherstonhaugh and
Mudge at that of the Aroostook Metjarmette portage is taken as the point
of bifurcation, whence waters run to the Penobscot, the St. John, and
the St. Lawrence.


  On the American line from the Metjarmette portage
  to Lake Etchemm--                                                Feet
    The maximum height is                                         1,718
    The minimum height is                                         1,218


The minimum measured height is that of Lake Etchemm, which is lower
than the actual source of that stream, and whose omission as not upon
the dividing ridge would make the minimum greater. This height was
determined by the parties of A. Talcott, esq, by two distinct and
separate sets of observations, one of which was continued hourly for
several days, and no doubt can exist that it is as accurate a measure
as the barometer is capable of affording. In the report of Messrs.
Featherstonhaugh and Mudge this height is set down as no more than
957 feet, but it is determined from a single observation. That it is
erroneous must be considered as demonstrated. In the map presented by
those gentlemen they have made use of this erroneous determination for a
purpose which, even were it correct, would not be warranted, for they on
its authority leave out all the symbols by which heights are represented,
and substitute therefore a dotted line with the inscription "Fictitious
hills of Mr. Burnham's map." The actual character of this part of the
American line is an undulating country.


  On the line of Messrs. Featherstonhaugh and Mudge between
  the Metjarmette portage and the Cocumgamoc Mountains--           Feet
    The maximum elevation is                                      2,302
    The minimum elevation is                                        987


This part of the line of Messrs. Featherstonhaugh and Mudge derives its
apparent advantage from the fact that it crosses the summit and occupies
the eastern slope of the highlands claimed by the United States.
Notwithstanding this, the difference in their elevation is not such as
to give it any decided superiority in its highland character.


  On the American line from Lake Etchemm to the river Ouelle--     Feet
    The maximum height is                                         2,854
    The minimum height is                                         1,306

  On the line of Messrs Featherstonhaugh and Mudge from the
  Cocumgamoc Mountains to the head waters of the Aroostook--
    The maximum height is                                         1,268
    The minimum height is                                           880


On the parts of the line thus contrasted the maximum height of that
claimed by Great Britain is less elevated than the lowest gap of that
claimed by the United States.


  On the third portion of the American line

  From the head of the Ouelle to the Temiscouata portage--         Feet
    The maximum height is                                         2,231
    The minimum height is                                           853

  From the point where the line first crosses the Temiscouata
  portage to Mount Paradis--
    The maximum height is                                         1,983
    The minimum height is                                           906

  From the Temiscouata portage to the head of the Abagusquash--
    The maximum height is                                         1,510
    The minimum height is                                           676

  From Abagusquash to the Rimouski Lake--
    The maximum height is                                         1,824
    The minimum height is                                           651

  From the Rimouski Lake to the northwest angle--
    The maximum height is                                         1,841
    The minimum height is                                         1,014

  The greatest elevation of the whole of the third part of the
  American line, therefore, is                                    2,231
  The minimum is                                                    651


The termination of the exploring meridian line falls into this part
of the American line. Its height of 1,519 feet was determined by two
separate observations, compared with others taken on Lake Johnson.
The height of the latter was calculated at 1,007 feet from a series
of observations continued for seventeen days, and is believed to be
as accurate as the method of the barometer is susceptible of.

This height of the termination of that line is estimated by Messrs.
Featherstonhaugh and Mudge at no more than 388 feet, and that of the
lake at no more than 363. In this estimate they reject the indications
of their own barometers, because the results of them would have
contradicted the previous impressions which seem to have governed all
their operations, viz, that the point claimed by the United States as
the northwest angle of Nova Scotia is not in an elevated region of
country.[34]

[Footnote 34: A continuous line of leveling was carried by one of the
parties of Major Graham's division, by means of two spirit levels
checking one another, from tide water at Calais, in Maine, to the
monument at the source of the St. Croix, and thence along the true
meridian line to its intersection with the river St. John. The surface
of the St. John at this point of intersection was thus found to be
419-1/2 feet above the level of mean tide at Calais. The basin of the
river immediately above the Grand Falls may be stated as of the same
elevation in round numbers, as there is very little current in the river
between those two points.]

On the third part of the British line from the sources of the Aroostook
to the Grand Falls of the St. John no height is reported as measured by
the British commissioners which exceeds 1,050 feet, while the greatest
height on their profile is 1,150 feet. The minimum height on their
profile, excluding the Aroostook at its mouth and its intersection with
the meridian line, is 243 feet, and the mean of the numbers entered by
them both on their map and profile is 665 feet.

It will therefore appear that if the profile of Messrs. Featherstonhaugh
and Mudge be correct the lowest gap on the third part of the American
line is about as high as the mean elevation of the part of the British
line with which it is compared.

The line claimed by the United States therefore possesses throughout in
a pre-eminent degree the highland character according to the sense at
one time contended for in the argument of Great Britain, and is, to use
the term of the British commissioners, "the axis of maximum elevation,"
the mean of all the heights measured upon it being 1,459 feet, while
that of those measured on the line of Messrs. Featherstonhaugh and Mudge
is no more than 1,085 feet.

It is regretted that the computations of the barometric and other
observations for the determination of the heights of that portion of
the country between the valley of the St. John and the sources of the
Aroostook, explored by the division of Major Graham, could not be
completed in time to be made use of for this report in the description
of that portion of the line claimed for Great Britain by Messrs.
Featherstonhaugh and Mudge. This delay has been solely caused by
a want of reasonable time to complete this portion of the work, the
commissioner having direction of the division charged with it having
only returned from the field in the month of January.

Sufficient information is known, however, to have been derived from
those surveys to justify the assertion that, instead of the strongly
marked range of highlands represented by the British commissioners as
constituting a part of their "axis of maximum elevation," the country in
the vicinity of the Aroostook lying between its sources and the valley
of the St. John is devoid of the character they have attributed to it.
When properly represented upon a map it will appear as an extended
undulating surface of moderate elevation above the level of the
Aroostook River, sparsely interspersed with occasional detached
elevations rising to heights of 600 to 900 and 1,400 feet above the
level of the sea, but forming no continuous or connected chain whatever
in the direction represented by the British commissioners, or that could
be construed into the character of highlands such as are described in
the treaty of 1783.[35]

[Footnote 35: Since the above was written Major Graham's map and the
computations of the barometric heights above alluded to have been
completed.

This map exhibits in their proper positions the numerous altitudes which
were determined throughout the country watered by the Aroostook and its
principal tributaries, extending laterally to the heights which bound
the basin of that river on either side; along the due west line traced
in the year 1835 by Captain Yule, of the royal engineers, between Mars
Hill and a point near the forks of the Great Machias River; along and in
the vicinity of the road recently opened by the State of Maine from
Lewis's (a point in latitude 46 deg. 12' 20", between the head branches of
the Meduxnikeag and the Masardis or St. Croix of the Aroostook) to the
mouth of Fish River, in latitude 47 deg. 15' 13", being a distance, actually
measured, of 79 miles; and along the new military road, embracing 40-1/2
miles of the distance from Fort Fairfield to Houlton and including the
adjacent heights on either side.

The number of elevations within the territory watered by the Aroostook
and claimed by Great Britain that have thus been carefully measured
amounts to upward of 200.

This survey shows that although the prominent eminences which occur
along that portion of the "axis of maximum elevation" of Messrs. Mudge
and Featherstonhaugh which lies between the mouth and the source of
the Aroostook correspond very nearly in height and position by our
measurements with those reported by themselves, yet these eminences are
separated one from another by spaces of comparatively low and very often
swampy country, so extended as to preclude the idea of a continuous
range of highlands in the direction represented upon the map of those
commissioners.

If a range or chain of highlands is to be made to appear by drawing
a strongly marked line over widely extended valleys or districts of
comparatively low country so as to reach and connect the most prominent
eminences which may fall within the assumed direction, then such a range
or chain of highlands may here be made as plausibly in any other
direction as in that chosen by Messrs. Mudge and Featherstonhaugh, for
the detached elevated peaks are so distributed as under such a principle
to favor any one direction as much as another, and might thus be made to
subserve in an equal degree whatever conflicting theories the object in
view might cause to be originated.

We may also refer, in further illustration of the character of the
country through which a portion of this pretended "axis of maximum
elevation" is made to pass, to a panorama view taken in October, 1841,
by one of Major Graham's assistants from the summit of Blue Hill, where
crossed by the true meridian of the monument, at the source of the St.
Croix. This position is 1,100 feet above the level of the sea and 47-1/2
miles north of the monument. It commands a most satisfactory view of the
whole country embraced within a radius of 40 to 60 miles, including, as
the landscape shows, Parks Hill to the south; Katahdin, the Traveller,
and Mars Hill to the southwest; Quaquajo, the Horseback, the Haystack,
and one or two peaks beyond the Aroostook to the west; the heights upon
the Fish River and the southern margin of the Eagle Lakes to the
northwest, and those south of the St. John (except a small angle
obstructed by the Aroostook Hill) to the north.

The character of the great basin of the Aroostook, dotted with the
detached peaks which rise abruptly from it at intervals of many miles
apart, is here exhibited through at least two-thirds of its extent in so
satisfactory a manner as in itself to preclude the idea of an "axis of
maximum elevation" composed of anything like a connected or continuous
chain in this region of country.

MAY 1 1842.]

In addition to the surveys upon the boundary line claimed by the United
States, an exploring line was run under the direction of Professor
Renwick, as is more particularly described in Appendix No. 1. This line
extended to an eminence on the eastern side of Lake Matapediac, elevated
1,743 feet above the level of the sea. The views obtained from this
eminence established the fact that a chain of highlands extended thence
to the north shore of the Bay des Chaleurs. They are believed to
terminate in an eminence, which from its imposing appearance has been
called by the Scotch settlers at its foot Ben Lomond. This was measured
during the operations of the summer of 1840, and found to rise from
the tide of the bay to the height of 1,024 feet. This exploring line,
coupled with the more accurate surveys, appears to establish the fact of
the existence of a continuous chain of eminences entitled to the epithet
of highlands from the north shore of the Bay des Chaleurs at its western
extremity to the sources of the Connecticut River. Returning from the
latter point, they exhibit the aspect of well-marked ranges of mountains
as far as the sources of the Metjarmette. Thence to the sources of the
Etchemin extends an undulating country whose mean height is 1,300 or
1,500 feet above the level of the sea. The boundary line is thence
prolonged to the Temiscouata portage over well-defined ridges to the
eastern side of Lake Temiscouata. At the sources of two of the streams
which run into this lake the minimum heights of 651 feet and 676 feet
have been observed.

With these exceptions, the sources of the streams which rise to the
north of the Temiscouata portage and between the lake of that name and
Lake Matapediac average more than 900 feet above the level of the sea.
For the purpose of describing this portion of the line claimed by the
United States, we may take this height of 900 feet as the elevation of
a horizontal plane or base. On this are raised knolls, eminences, and
short ridges whose heights above this assumed base vary from 300 to
1,300 feet. The more elevated of these are universally designated by the
hunters who occasionally visit the country and the lumberers who search
it for timber as mountains clothed to the summit with wood, which, in
consequence of the rigor of the climate, attains but a feeble growth.
They have an aspect of much greater altitude than they in reality
possess, but their character as highlands is indisputable. This term,
which the first English visitors ascribed without hesitation to the
hills of New Jersey,[36] whose altitude is about 300 feet above the
level of the sea, is much better merited by a group of eminences rising
from 300 to 1,300 feet above a base itself 900 feet in height, and which
exceed in elevation the well-known highlands of the Hudson River.

[Footnote 36: The highlands of Neversink.]

Not to rest merely on instances drawn from the language of those of
English birth who first settled or traded on the coast of the present
United States, there are in the immediate vicinity of the region in
question a range of eminences the highest of which is no more than
1,206 feet above the level of the sea. These, on the authority of a
distinguished officer of Her Britannic Majesty's navy,[37] are named
the "highlands of Bic," and have long been thus known by all the
navigators of the St. Lawrence who use the English tongue.

[Footnote 37: Captain Byfield.]

To sum up the results of the field operations of the commissioners:

(1) The meridian has been traced by astronomic observations from the
monument, established by the consent of both nations in 1798, at the
source of the St. Croix to a point 4 miles beyond the left bank of the
St. John in the neighborhood of the Grand Falls. In the course of this
not only has no highland dividing waters which run into the St. Lawrence
from those which run into the Atlantic been reached, but no common
source or reservoir of two streams running in opposite directions.[38]
No place has, therefore, been found which by any construction proposed
or attempted to be put on the words of the treaty of 1783 can be
considered as the northwest angle of Nova Scotia. This point must, in
consequence, lie in the further prolongation of the meridian line to
the north.

[Footnote 38: The levelings carried along this meridian line by means of
spirit levels, alluded to in the note at bottom of page 121, passed Mars
Hill at a depression of 12 feet _below_ the level of the base of the
monument which stands (except at seasons of extreme drought) in the
water at the source of the St. Croix.]

(2) The streams whose title to the name of the northwesternmost head of
the Connecticut River is in dispute have been explored, and the line of
the highlands has been traced from their sources to the point at which
the lines respectively claimed by the two nations diverge from each
other.

(3) The line claimed by Messrs. Featherstonhaugh and Mudge, on the part
of Great Britain, has been in a great measure explored.

(4) The line of highlands claimed by the United States has, with some
small exceptions, been thoroughly examined, and its prolongation as far
as the north shore of the Bay of Chaleurs reconnoitered. The parts of
the line which have not been actually reached have been seen from a
distance, and streams flowing from them crossed and leveled. From the
former indication it is probable that the average height of those parts
exceeds that of the neighboring parts of the line. From the heights of
the streams it is certain that the lowest gaps in the unexplored portion
of the line can not be less elevated than 1,000 feet above the level of
the sea.

That part of this line of highlands which lies east of the sources of
the Rimouski fulfills to the letter the words of the royal proclamation
of 1763 and the contemporaneous commission of Governor Wilmot. The first
of those instruments defines the mouth of the river St. Lawrence by a
line drawn from Cape Rozier to the St. John River (on the Labrador
coast), and therefore all to the eastward of that line is "the sea." The
height of land thus traced by the commission, rising from the north
shore of the Bay des Chaleurs at its western extremity, divides waters
which fall into the river St. Lawrence from those which fall into the
sea, and is the southern boundary of the Province established by the
proclamation of 1763 under the name of Quebec. The identity of the line
defined in the proclamation of 1763 and the boundary of the United
States in the treaty of 1783 has been uniformly maintained on the part
of the United States, and is not merely admitted but strenuously argued
for in the report of Messrs. Featherstonhaugh and Mudge.

The undersigned therefore report that they have explored and in a great
measure surveyed and leveled a line of highlands in which the northwest
angle of Nova Scotia lies, and which in their opinion is the true
boundary between the States of Maine and New Hampshire and the British
Provinces.


II.--EXAMINATION OF THE ARGUMENT CONTAINED IN THE REPORT OF MESSRS.
MUDGE AND FEATHERSTONHAUGH.

The progress which has been made in the first portion of the duties
of the commissioners has been set forth in the preceding part of this
report.

Although, as will be there seen, the task of running the meridian line
of the monument marking the source of the St. Croix and of exploring and
surveying the lines of highlands respectively claimed by the Governments
of the United States and Great Britain has not been completed, yet
enough has been done to furnish materials for an examination of the
argument preferred by Messrs. Mudge and Featherstonhaugh in support of
the novel form in which the claim of Great Britain has been presented
by them.

In the surveys made by direction of the commissioners under the fifth
article of the treaty of Ghent the difficult character of the country
had prevented any other method of exploration than that of ascending
rivers to their sources. It was believed on the part of the United
States that the determination of the position of these sources was
sufficient for the demarcation of the line of highlands in relation to
which the controversy exists, and no attempt was made to meet the
British argument by the exhibition of the fact that the lines joining
these sources run in some cases along ridges and in other cases pass
over elevations to which in any sense of the term the epithet of
"highlands" may be justly applied. The denial of this mode of
determining the line of highlands by Great Britain has made it important
that both the lines claimed by Great Britain and by the United States
should be explored and leveled--a task which until recently had not been
attempted on either part. The examination of the lines claimed by the
two nations, respectively, has been in a great measure accomplished, as
will be seen from the reports of the field operations of the commission,
while such of these determinations as have a direct bearing on the
argument will be cited in their proper place in this report.

It is to be regretted that the document now under consideration exhibits
many instances of an unfriendly spirit. Charges of direct and implied
fraud are made, and language is used throughout that is irritating and
insulting. It is fondly hoped that these passages do not express the
sentiments of the British nation, as in a state of feeling such as
this report indicates little hope could be entertained of an amicable
adjustment of this question. Any inference to be drawn from the language
of the report under consideration is contradicted by the official
declarations of the British Government, and may therefore be considered
as the individual act of the authors, not as the deliberate voice of the
nation by which they were employed.

It might have been easy to have retorted similar charges, and thus have
excited in the Government of Great Britain feelings of irritation
similar to those which pervaded the whole population of the United
States on the reception of that report. While, however, it is due
to the honor of the United States to declare that no desire of undue
aggrandizement has been felt, no claim advanced beyond what a strict
construction of their rights will warrant, it is trusted that the
pretensions of Great Britain, however unfounded in fact or principle,
have been advanced with a like disregard to mere extension of territory,
and urged with the same good faith which has uniformly characterized the
proceedings of the United States.

It is not to be wondered that the claims of Great Britain have been
urged with the utmost pertinacity and supported by every possible form
of argument. The territory in question is of great value to her, by
covering the only mode of communication which can exist for nearly six
months in the year, not only between two valuable colonies, but between
the most important of all her possessions and the mother country. The
time is not long past when the use of this very communication was not an
unimportant part of the means by which that colony was restrained from
an attempt to assert its independence. It is not, therefore, surprising
that the feelings of British statesmen and of those who desired to win
their favor have been more obvious in the several arguments which have
appeared on that side of the question than a sober view of the true
principles, on which alone a correct opinion of the case can be founded.

To the United States in their collective capacity the territory in
dispute is, on the other hand, of comparatively little moment. No other
desire is felt throughout the greater part of the Union than that the
question should be settled upon just principles. No regret could,
therefore, be widely felt if it should be satisfactorily shown that the
title of Great Britain to this region is indisputable. But should it be
shown, as is beyond all question the fact, that the title is in truth in
the United States, national honor forbids that this title should be
abandoned. To the States of Maine and Massachusetts, who are the joint
proprietors of the unseated lands, the territory is of a certain
importance from the value of the land and timber, and to the latter,
within whose jurisdiction it falls, as a future means of increasing her
relative importance in the Union, and a just and proper feeling on the
part of their sister States must prevent their yielding to any unfounded
claim or the surrender of any territory to which a title can be
established without an equivalent satisfactory to those States.

To show the basis on which the title rests--

It is maintained on the part of the United States that the territory
they held on the continent of North America prior to the purchase of
Louisiana and the Floridas was possessed by a title derived from their
own Declaration of Independence on the 4th of July, 1776, the assertion
of that independence in a successful war, and its acknowledgment by
Great Britain as a preliminary to any negotiation for a treaty of peace.
It is admitted on the part of Great Britain that a territory designated
by certain limits was _granted_ to the United States in the treaty of
1783. As a matter of national pride, the question whether the territory
of the original United States was held by the right of war or by virtue
of a grant from the British Crown is not unimportant; as a basis of
title it has not the least bearing on the subject. From the date of the
treaty of 1783 all pretensions of the British Crown to jurisdiction or
property within the limits prescribed by the provisions of that
instrument ceased, and when a war arose in 1812 between the two nations
it was terminated by the treaty of Ghent, in which the original
boundaries were confirmed and acknowledged on both sides.

The treaty of 1783, therefore, is, in reference to this territory, the
only instrument of binding force upon the two parties; nor can any other
document be with propriety brought forward in the discussion except for
the purpose of explaining and rendering definite such of the provisions
of that treaty as are obscure or apparently uncertain.

The desire of full and ample illustration, which has actuated both
parties, has led to the search among neglected archives for documents
almost innumerable, and their force and bearing upon the question have
been exhibited in arguments of great ability. Such has been the talent
shown in this task of illustration and so copious have been the
materials employed for the purpose that the great and only important
question, although never lost sight of by the writers themselves, has
to the eye of the casual observer been completely hidden. In the report
under consideration this distinction between treaties of binding force
and documents intended for mere illustration has not been regarded, and
the vague as well as obviously inaccurate delineations of a French or a
Venetian map maker are gravely held forth as of equal value for a basis
of argument as the solemn and ratified acts of the two nations.

In pursuance of this desire of illustration, every known document which
could in any form support either claim has been advanced and set forth
in the statements laid before His Majesty the King of the Netherlands
when acting as umpire under the fifth article of the treaty of Ghent. If
not yet given entire to the public,[39] they are in the possession of
both Governments in a printed form, together with the opinion of the
arbiter in respect to them; and although it is necessary that the
arguments then adduced in favor of the American claim should be in part
repeated, and although new illustrations of the correctness of that
argument have since been brought to light, the present document will be
confined as closely as possible to the provisions of the treaty itself,
and will adduce no more of illustration than is barely sufficient to
render the terms of that treaty certain and definite.

[Footnote 39: A considerable part of the papers, together with the
argument, has been published by Mr. Gallatin in his Right of the United
States to the Northeastern Boundary. New York, 1840. 8 vo. pp. 180.]

The boundaries of the United States are described in the treaty of 1783
in the following words:[40]

[Footnote 40: The words here appearing in italics are not italicized in
the original treaty.]

"And that _all disputes which might arise in future on the subject
of the boundaries of the said United States may be prevented_ it is
hereby agreed and declared that the following are and shall be their
boundaries, viz: _From the northwest angle of Nova Scotia_, viz, _that
angle which is formed by a line drawn due north from the source of
St. Croix River to the highlands; along the said highlands which divide
those rivers that empty themselves into the river St. Lawrence from
those which fall into the Atlantic Ocean_ to the _northwesternmost_ head
of Connecticut River; _thence_ down along the middle of that river to
the forty-fifth degree of north latitude; from thence by a line due west
on said latitude until it strikes the river Iroquois, or Cataraquy;
thence along the middle of said river into Lake Ontario; through the
middle of said lake until it strikes the communication by water between
that lake and Lake Brie; thence along the middle of said communication
into Lake Erie through the middle of said lake until it arrives at the
water communication between that lake and Lake Huron; thence along the
middle of said water communication into the Lake Huron; thence through
the middle of said lake to the water communication between that lake and
Lake Superior; thence through Lake Superior northward of the Isles Royal
and Phelipeaux to the Long Lake; thence through the middle of said Long
Lake and the water communication between it and the Lake of the Woods to
the said Lake of the Woods; thence through the said lake to the most
northwestern point thereof, and from thence on a due west course to the
river Mississippi; thence by a line to be drawn along the middle of the
said river Mississippi until it shall intersect the northernmost part of
the thirty-first degree of north latitude; south by a line to be drawn
due east from the determination of the line last mentioned in the
latitude of 31 deg. north of the equator to the middle of the river
Apalachicola, or Catahouche; thence along the middle thereof to its
junction with the Flint River; thence straight to the head of St. Marys
River, and thence down along the middle of St. Marys River to the
Atlantic Ocean; east _by a line to be drawn along the middle of the
river St. Croix from its mouth in the Bay of Fundy to its source_ and
from its source _directly north_ to the aforesaid highlands which divide
the rivers that fall into the Atlantic Ocean from those which fall into
the river St. Lawrence; comprehending all islands within 20 leagues of
any part of the shores of the United States and lying between lines to
be drawn due east from the points where the aforesaid boundaries between
Nova Scotia on the one part and East Florida on the other shall
respectively touch the Bay of Fundy and the Atlantic Ocean, excepting
such islands as now are or heretofore have been within the limits of
the said Province of Nova Scotia."

So far as the present question is concerned, five points of discussion
are presented by this article of the treaty of 1783:

I. What stream is to be understood by the name of the river St. Croix?

II. The determination of the line due north from the source of that
river.

III. What is the position of the northwest angle of Nova Scotia?

IV. The delineation of the line passing through the highlands from that
angle to the northwest head of Connecticut River.

V. What is to be considered as the northwestern head of Connecticut
River?


I.--RIVER ST. CROIX.

Doubts in respect to the particular river intended to be understood by
the name of the St. Croix having arisen, an article was inserted in the
treaty of commerce signed in London in November, 1794, by Lord Grenville
on the part of Great Britain and by John Jay on the part of the United
States.[41] This article, the fifth of that treaty, provided for the
appointment of a joint commission with full powers to decide that
question. This commission was constituted in conformity, and the award
was accepted by both Governments.[42] The river designated in this award
became thenceforth the true St. Croix, however erroneous may have been
the grounds on which it was decided so to be. When, therefore, in the
fourth article of the treaty of Ghent it is declared that the due north
line from the source of the St. Croix has not been surveyed, and when in
this and the other articles of the same treaty all other uncertain parts
of the boundary are recited, the validity of the decision of the
commissioners under the fifth article of Jay's treaty is virtually
acknowledged. Nay, more; the acknowledgment is completed by the
stipulation in the second article of the treaty of Ghent that "all
territory, places, and possessions taken by either party during the
war," with certain exceptions, shall be forthwith restored to their
previous possessors.[43] The only exceptions are the islands in
Passamaquoddy Bay; and had it been believed that any uncertainty in
respect to the adjacent territory existed it would not have been
neglected. Nay, more; all the settlements lying within the line claimed
by Great Britain before the commission created by the treaty of 1794 had
been taken, and were in her actual possession at the time the treaty of
Ghent took effect, and were forthwith restored to the jurisdiction of
the United States. When, also, it became necessary to proceed to the
investigation of the second point of the discussion, the agents and
surveyors of both parties proceeded as a matter of course to the point
marked in 1798 as the source of the St. Croix.[44] This point is
therefore fixed and established beyond the possibility of cavil, and the
faith of both Governments is pledged that it shall not be disturbed.

[Footnote 41: See Note I, pp. 141,142.]

[Footnote 42: See Note II, p. 142.]

[Footnote 43: See Note III, pp. 142,143.]

[Footnote 44: See Note IV, p. 143.]

II.--DUE NORTH LINE FROM THE SOURCE OF THE ST. CROIX.

The treaty of 1783 provides that the boundary from the source of the
St. Croix shall be drawn "directly north." In relation to this expression
no possible doubt can arise. It is neither susceptible of more than a
single meaning nor does it require illustration from any extrinsic
source. The undersigned, therefore, do not consider that so much of the
argument of Messrs. Mudge and Featherstonhaugh as attempts to show that
this line ought to be drawn in any other direction than due north
requires any reply on the part of the United States. Admitting that the
words had been originally used as a mistranslation of terms in the Latin
grant of James I to Sir William Alexander, the misconception was equally
shared by both parties to the treaty of 1783; and it will be shown
hereafter that this misconception, if any, had its origin in British
official papers. Were it capable of proof beyond all possibility of
denial that the limit of the grant to Sir William Alexander was intended
to be a line drawn toward the northwest instead of the north it would
not affect the question. So far as that grant was used by American
negotiators to illustrate the position of the northwest angle of Nova
Scotia it would have failed to fulfill the object, but such failure in
illustration does not involve the nullity of the treaty itself.

That the translation which has hitherto been universally received as
correct of the terms in the grant to Sir William Alexander is the true
one, and that the new construction which is now attempted to be put upon
it is inaccurate, will be shown in another place,[45] where will also be
exhibited an error committed in rendering the sense of another part of
that instrument. The consideration of the correctness or incorrectness
of the several translations can form no part of the present argument.
While, therefore, it is denied that Messrs. Mudge and Featherstonhaugh
have succeeded in showing that the grant to Sir William Alexander has
been mistranslated, it is maintained that an error in the translation of
this document can have no effect in setting aside the simple and
positive terms of the treaty of 1783. That treaty and its confirmation
in the treaty of Ghent must be admitted to be null and void before that
line can be drawn in any other direction than "due north."

[Footnote 45: See Note V, pp. 143-147.]


III.--NORTH WEST ANGLE OF NOVA SCOTIA.

The term northwest angle of Nova Scotia was used in the secret
instructions of Congress and is adopted in the treaty of 1783. In the
instructions it is named without any explanation, as if it were a point
perfectly well known. In one sense it was so, for although it never had
been marked by a monument, nor perhaps visited by the foot of man, its
position could be laid down upon a map; nay, was so on many existing
maps, and the directions for finding it on the ground were clear and
explicit. These directions are to be found in the royal proclamation of
October, 1763, and in the commission to Montague Wilmot, governor of
Nova Scotia, of cotemporaneous date. Any uncertainty in regard to the
position of this angle which may have existed in relation to the meaning
of the first of these instruments is removed by the act of Parliament of
1774, commonly called the Quebec act.

Before citing these instruments it will be proper to refer to the
circumstances under which the two first were issued.

Great Britain, after a successful war, found herself in possession of
the whole eastern side of the continent of North America. So much of
this as lay to the south of the St. Lawrence and the forty-fifth
parallel of north latitude had been previously made the subject of
charters from the British Crown under a claim of right from priority of
discovery.[46] The possession of this wide tract was not uncontested,
and various other European nations had attempted to found settlements
within the limits of the British charters. In such cases it was held as
a matter of law that where the occupation or defense of the territory
granted had been neglected the right had ceased, and the country, when
recovered by conquest or restored by treaty, was again vested in the
Crown, to be made the subject of new grants or governed as a royal
colony. Thus, when the settlements made by the Dutch and Swedes, which
by the fortune of war had become wholly vested in Holland, were reduced,
the Crown exercised its rights by conveying them to the Duke of York,
although covered in a great part, if not wholly, by previous charters;
and when these countries were again occupied by the Dutch and restored
by the treaty of Breda it was thought necessary that the title of the
Duke of York should be restored by a fresh grant. In both of these
charters to that prince was included the Province of Sagadahock, within
whose chartered limits was comprised the territory at present in
dispute. This Province, confined on the sea between the rivers St. Croix
and Kennebec, had for its opposite limits the St. Lawrence, or, as the
grant expresses it, "extending from the river of Kenebeque and so upward
by the shortest course to the river Canada northward." The shortest
course from the source of the Kennebec to the St. Lawrence is by the
present Kennebec road. This grant therefore covered the whole space
along the St. Lawrence from about the mouth of the Chaudiere River[47]
to the eastern limit of the grant to Sir William Alexander. By the
accession of James II, or, as some maintain, by the act of attainder, it
matters not which, this Province reverted to the Crown, and was by it
granted, in 1691, to the colony of Massachusetts. In the same charter
Nova Scotia also was included. This has been called a war grant, as in
fact it was, and the colony of Massachusetts speedily availed themselves
of it by conquering the whole of the territory conveyed except the
island of Cape Breton. The latter, too, fell before the unassisted arms
of the New England Provinces in 1745, at a time when Great Britain was
too deeply engaged in the contest of a civil war to give aid either in
money or in men to her transatlantic possessions.

[Footnote 46: Sebastian Cabot, in the employ of Henry VII, discovered
the continent of North America 24th June, 1497, and explored it from
Hudsons Bay to Florida in 1498. Columbus discovered South America 1st
August, 1498, while the voyage of Vespucci, whose name has been given to
the continent, was not performed until 1499.--HUMBOLDT.]

[Footnote 47: See Note VI, p. 147.]

The colony of Massachusetts, therefore, could not be charged with any
want of energy in asserting her chartered rights to the territory in
question. It is, in fact, due to her exertions that both Nova Scotia
and New Brunswick came at so early a period into the possession of the
British Crown. In 1654 the French settlements as far as Port Royal, at
the head of the Bay of Fundy, were reduced by Major Sedgwick, but by the
treaty of Breda they were restored to France.

In 1690 Sir William Phips, governor of Massachusetts, with a force
of 700 men, raised in that colony, again conquered the country, and
although on his return the French dislodged the garrison possession
was forthwith resumed by an expedition under Colonel Church. Acadie,
however, or Nova Scotia, was ceded again to France by the treaty of
Ryswick. After several spirited but unsuccessful attempts during the War
of the Succession, General Nicholson, with a force of five regiments,
four of which were levied in Massachusetts, reduced Port Royal, and by
its capitulation the present Provinces of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick
were permanently annexed to the British Crown.[48] Finally the militia
of Massachusetts, during the War of 1776, took possession of the
territory, and occupied it until the date of the treaty of 1783. This
occupation was not limited by the St. Croix, or even by the St. John,
but included the whole of the southern part of New Brunswick, while the
peninsula of Nova Scotia was only preserved to Great Britain by the
fortification of the isthmus which unites it to the mainland.[49]

[Footnote 48: Haliburton's History, Vol. I, pp. 83-87.]

[Footnote 49: Haliburton's History, Vol. I, pp. 244-289.]

The recession of Acadie, or Nova Scotia, to France by the treaty of
Ryswick divested Massachusetts only of the territory granted her in the
charter of 1691 under the latter name. Her war title to Sagadahock was
confirmed by a conquest with her own unaided arms; and even the cession
of Nova Scotia was a manifest injustice to her, as she was at the moment
in full possession of it. It, however, suited the purpose of Great
Britain to barter this part of the conquest of that colony for objects
of more immediate interest.

Admitting that England did convey a part or the whole of Sagadahock to
France under the vague name of Acadie or Nova Scotia,[50] the conquest
by Massachusetts in 1710 renewed her rights to this much at least, and
although the Crown appropriated to itself the lion's share of the spoils
by making Nova Scotia a royal province, it did not attempt to disturb
her possession of Sagadahock. So far from so doing, the commission of
the royal governors was limited to the west by the St. Croix, although
it was stated in a saving clause that the Province of Nova Scotia
extended of right to the Penobscot. From that time until the breaking
out of the Revolutionary War, a space of more than sixty years, the
Province of Sagadahock was left in the undisturbed possession of
Massachusetts under the charter of 1691.

[Footnote 50: See Note VII, pp. 147, 148.]

In defiance of this charter the French proceeded to occupy the right
bank of the St. Lawrence, which at the time of the capture of Quebec and
the cession in the treaty of 1763 was partially held by settlements of
Canadians. The Crown therefore acted upon the principle that the right
of Massachusetts to the right bank of the St. Lawrence had thus become
void, and proceeded by proclamation to form the possessions of France on
both banks of the St. Lawrence into a royal colony under the name of the
Province of Quebec.

This was not done without a decided opposition on the part of
Massachusetts, but any decision in respect to her claims was rendered
needless by the breaking out of the War of Independence. It is only
proper to remark that this opposition was in fact made and that her
claim to the right bank of the St. Lawrence was only abandoned by the
treaty of 1783. The country of which it was intended to divest her by
the proclamation of 1763 is described in a letter of her agent, Mr.
Mauduit, to the general court of that colony as "the narrow tract of
land which lies beyond the sources of all your rivers and is watered
by those which run into the St. Lawrence."

It is assigned by him as a reason why the Province of Massachusetts
should assent to the boundary assigned to the Province of Quebec by the
proclamation that "it would not be of any great consequence to you"
(Massachusetts), "but is absolutely necessary to the Crown to preserve
the continuity of the Province of Quebec." The part of the Province of
Quebec whose continuity with the rest of that colony was to be preserved
is evidently the district of Gaspe, of which Nova Scotia, a royal
colony, was divested by the same proclamation. For this continuity no
more was necessary than a road along the St. Lawrence itself, and the
reason would have been absurd if applied to any country lying beyond
the streams which fall into that river, for up to the present day no
communication between parts of Canada exists through any part of the
disputed territory. The narrow territory thus advised to be relinquished
extends, according to the views of Messrs. Mudge and Featherstonhaugh,
from the Great Falls of the St. John to Quebec, a distance in a straight
line of 160 miles. It has a figure not far from triangular, of which
this line is the perpendicular and the shore of the St. Lawrence from
the Chaudiere to the Metis the base. It contains about 16,000 square
miles. It would have been a perversion of language in Mr. Mauduit to
describe this to his employers as a narrow tract. But the space whose
cession he really intended to advise is in every sense a narrow tract,
for its length along the St. Lawrence is about 200 miles, and its
average breadth to the sources of the streams 30. It contains 6,000
square miles, and is described by him in a manner that leaves no
question as to its extent being "watered by streams" which "run into the
St. Lawrence." It therefore did not include any country watered by
streams which run into the St. John.

It is believed that this is the first instance in which the term
_narrow_ has ever been applied to a triangle almost right angled and
nearly isosceles, and it is not a little remarkable that this very
expression was relied upon in the statement to the King of the
Netherlands as one of the strongest proofs of the justice of the
American claim.

Admitting, however, for the sake of argument, that the Crown did demand
this territory, and that the mere advice of an agent without powers was
binding on Massachusetts, the fact would have no direct bearing upon the
point under consideration. The relinquishment by Massachusetts of the
whole of the territory west of the meridian of the St. Croix would not
have changed the position of the northwest angle of Nova Scotia, nor the
title of the United States collectively under the treaty of 1783 to a
boundary to be drawn from that angle, however it might have affected the
right of property of that State to the lands within it.

And here it is to be remarked that the Government of the United States
is two-fold--that of the individual States and that of the Federal
Union. It would be possible, therefore, that all right of property in
unseated lands within a State's jurisdiction might be in the General
Government, and this is in fact the case in all the new States. Even had
Massachusetts divested herself of the title (which she has not) the
treaty of 1783 would have vested it in the Confederation. She had at
least a color of title, under which the Confederation claimed to the
boundaries of Nova Scotia on the east and to the southern limits of the
Province of Quebec on the north, and this claim was allowed by Great
Britain in the treaty of 1783 in terms which are at least admitted to be
identical in meaning with those of the proclamation creating the latter
Province.[51]

[Footnote 51: Report of Messrs. Featherstonhaugh and Mudge, p. 6.]

To illustrate the subject further:

Of the seventeen British colonies in North America, thirteen succeeded
in asserting their independence; the two Floridas were conquered and
ceded to Spain; while of her magnificent American domain only Quebec and
Nova Scotia were left to Great Britain. The thirteen colonies, now
independent States, claimed all that part of the continent to the
eastward of the Mississippi and north of the bounds of Florida which was
not contained within the limits of the last-named colonies, and this
claim was fully admitted by the boundary agreed to in the treaty of
1783. Within the limits thus assigned it was well known that there were
conflicting claims to parts which had more than once been covered by
royal charters; it was even possible that there were portions of the
wide territory the right to which was asserted by the United States and
admitted by Great Britain that had not been covered by any royal grant;
but the jurisdiction in respect to disputed rights and the title to land
not conveyed forever ceased to be in the British Crown--first by a
successful assertion of independence in arms, and finally by the
positive terms of a solemn treaty.

If it should be admitted, for argument's sake, that the claim of
Massachusetts, as inherited by the State of Maine, to the disputed
territory is unfounded, it is a circumstance that can not enter into
a discussion between Great Britain and the United States of America.
Massachusetts did claim, under at least the color of a title, not merely
to "the highlands," but to the St. Lawrence itself, and the claim was
admitted as far as the former by the treaty of 1783. If it should
hereafter appear that this claim can not be maintained, the territory
which is not covered by her title, if within the boundary of the treaty
of 1783, can not revert to Great Britain, which has ceded its rights to
the thirteen independent States, but to the latter in their confederate
capacity, and is thus the property of the whole Union. As well might
Great Britain set up a claim to the States of Alabama and Mississippi,
which, although claimed by the State of Georgia, were found not to be
covered by its royal charter, as to any part of the territory contained
within the line defined by the treaty of 1783, under pretense that the
rights of Massachusetts are not indefeasible.

While, therefore, it is maintained that whether the title of
Massachusetts be valid or not is immaterial to the present question,
it may be further urged that not even the shadow of a pretense existed
for divesting her of her rights by the proclamation of 1763, except to
territory which by neglect she had permitted France to occupy. On this
point the French are the best authority, for it can not be pretended
that the Crown of England intended in forming the Province of Quebec
to go beyond the utmost limits of the claim of France to her colony of
Canada. The assertions on the part of France in the argument preceding
the War of 1756 were:

First. That both banks of the St. Lawrence are included in Canada.

Second. That with the exception of Miscou and Cape Breton, her grants
extended 10 leagues from the river.

Third. That the commissions of the governors of Canada in the most
formal and precise manner extended their jurisdiction to the sources
of the rivers which discharge themselves into the St. Lawrence.

Now the distance of 10 French leagues and that of the sources of the
rivers, on an average, are nearly identical, and this narrow tract, of
which alone the Crown could with any shadow of justice assume the right
of disposing, is that of which Massachusetts was intended to be divested
by the proclamation of 1763.

It was because Great Britain held that these claims on the part of
France were too extensive that the War of 1756 was waged. In this war at
least one-half of the force which under Wolfe took Louisburg and reduced
Quebec, and under Amherst forced the French armies in Canada to a
capitulation, was raised and paid by the colonies. The creation of the
Province of Quebec, covering a part of their chartered limits, was
therefore a just subject of complaint.

The bounds assigned to the new Province of Quebec to the south by the
proclamation of 7th October, 1763, are as follows:

"The line, crossing the river St. Lawrence and the Lake Champlain in 45 deg.
of north latitude, passes along the highlands which divide the rivers
that empty themselves into the St. Lawrence from those which fall into
the sea, and also along the north coast of the Bay des Chaleurs and the
Gulf of St. Lawrence to Cape Rosieres," etc.

In the same month of October, 1763, the limits of the royal Province of
Nova Scotia are fixed, in the commission to Governor Wilmot, on the west
"by the said river St. Croix to its source, and by a line drawn due
north from thence to the southern boundary of our Province of Quebec; to
the northward, by the same boundary, as far as the western extremity of
the Bay des Chaleurs."

Here, then, we find the first mention in an English dress of the line
to be drawn due north from the source of the St. Croix. There is no
evidence that it was a translation of the terms in the grant to Sir
William Alexander, but if it were it was made not by Americans, but by
Englishmen; and not only made, but set forth under the high authority of
the royal sign manual and authenticated by the great seal of the United
Kingdom of England and Scotland.

The due north line from the source of the St. Croix, meeting the south
bounds of the Province of Quebec, forms two angles. One of these was
the northeast angle of the Province of Sagadahock; the other is the
northwest angle of Nova Scotia. It aright be debated which of the
streams that fall into Passamaquoddy Bay was the true St. Croix, but
such a question could be settled by reference to evidence, and has been
thus settled by the award of the commissioners under the fifth article
of Jay's treaty. Among the many branches of a stream it may for a moment
be doubted which is to be considered as its principal source, but this
can be ascertained by proper methods, and it has been ascertained and
marked with a monument by the same commissioners. The tracing of a
meridian line may be a difficult operation in practical surveying, but
it can be effected by proper instruments and adequate skill, and this
task has in fact been performed by one of the present commissioners,
after being attempted by the surveyors under the fifth article of the
treaty of Ghent. The highlands are defined in the commission of Governor
Wilmot and the proclamation of 1763 beyond the possibility of doubt.
They are on the north shore of the Bay of Chaleurs as described in the
one instrument, and on the western extremity of that bay as described
by the other. They can therefore be found, and they have been found.

The Congress of 1779 and the framers of the treaty of 1783 were
therefore warranted in speaking of the northwest angle of Nova Scotia as
if it were a known point. It could have been laid down with precision on
any good map; it could be discovered by the use of adequate methods and
the expenditure of a sufficient appropriation; it was, in fact, as well
known as the forty-fifth and thirty-second parallels of latitude, which
are named in the same article of the treaty, or as the boundaries of
very many of the States which had united in the Confederation. These
were defined by the course and sources of rivers--by parallels of
latitude and circles of longitude, either of indefinite extent or
setting out from some prescribed point whose position was to be
determined. At the time of making these grants, as in the case before
us, many of the boundaries had never been visited by civilized men. Some
of these lines had, indeed, been sought and traced upon the ground in
pursuance of orders from the privy council of Great Britain or the high
court of chancery, and the recollection of the operation was fresh in
the memory of both parties. Thus in 1750 it was ordered by the latter
tribunal that the boundary on the lower counties on the Delaware (now
the State of that name) and the Province of Maryland should be marked
out. The boundary was an arc of a circle described around the town of
Newcastle, with a given radius, and a meridian line tangent thereto.
This was a far more difficult operation than to draw a meridian line
from a given point, such as the source of a river. It was thought
in 1763 worthy of the attention of the first assistant in the Royal
Observatory at Greenwich, and the American Rittenhouse was associated
with him. This operation was not only of great contemporary fame, but
is still quoted in English books among the data whence we derive our
knowledge of the magnitude and figure of the earth. So also the same
astronomer (Mason) had but a few years before the War of Independence
commenced the tracing of a parallel of latitude from the former line
to the westward, thus marking the respective limits of Pennsylvania,
Maryland, and Virginia. With such examples before them the framers of
the treaty of 1783 were warranted in considering the northwest angle
of Nova Scotia as a point sufficiently definite to be made not merely
one of the landmarks of the new nation, but the corner at which the
description of its boundaries should begin. It has been well remarked by
one of the commentators[52] on the report of Messrs. Featherstonhaugh
and Mudge that if the treaty of 1783 be a grant the grantors are bound
by rule of law to mark out that corner of their _own land_ whence the
description of the grant commences. The British Government therefore
ought, if it be, as it is maintained on its part, a grant, to have
traced the line of highlands dividing their Provinces of Nova Scotia
and Canada. Had this been done in conformity with the proclamation of
1763 and the commission to Governor Wilmot, the northwest angle of Nova
Scotia would be given by the trace of the meridian of the St. Croix.
So far from doing this, the question has been complicated by the denial
that the boundaries defined in that proclamation and in the treaty of
1783 were intended to be identical. The argument on this point was so
ingenious that the arbiter under the fifth article of the treaty of
Ghent did not consider the American case as made out,[53] and this doubt
was the principal ground on which his decision rested. It is therefore
an earnest of a more favorable state of feeling that the sophistry with
which this fact had been veiled, at least in part, is now withdrawn, and
that the commission whose report is under consideration frankly admit
this identity.[54] This admission being made, it is obvious that the
origin of the highlands of the treaty must be sought on the north shore
of the Bay des Chaleurs and at its western extremity, and it follows
that the point where this line of highlands is cut by the meridian of
the monument at the source of the St. Croix is the northwest angle of
Nova Scotia of the treaty of 1783, and must lie to the north of the
Restigouche, or in the very spot claimed by the United States.

[Footnote 52: Hon. John Holmes, of Maine.]

[Footnote 53: See Note VIII, p. 148.]

[Footnote 54: Report of Messrs. Featherstonhaugh and Mudge, pp. 6, 23.]

The British Government has not only failed in marking out the corner of
their territory at which the boundary of the United States begins, but
has in practice adopted a very different point as the northwest angle of
the Province of New Brunswick, which now occupies the place of ancient
Nova Scotia in its contiguity to the American lines. Up to the time of
the discussion before the King of the Netherlands the commissions of the
governors of New Brunswick had been, so far as the western and northern
boundaries are concerned, copies of that to Governor Wilmot. The
undersigned have no means of ascertaining when or how the form of these
commissions was changed, but it was found during the exploration of the
country that the jurisdiction of New Brunswick, limited at least to the
north of the St. John by the exploring meridian line, did not leave the
Bay of Chaleurs at its western extremity and follow thence the old
bounds of the Province of Quebec. It, on the contrary, was ascertained
that it was limited by the Restigouche as far as the confluence of its
southwestern branch, formerly known by the name of Chacodi, and thence
followed the latter up to the point where it is crossed by the exploring
meridian line. On all the territory thus severed from the ancient domain
of Nova Scotia permits to cut timber were found to have been issued by
Canadian authorities, and the few settlers derived their titles to land
from the same source.

Although this demarcation involves a double deviation from the
proclamation of 1763 (first, in following a river instead of highlands;
second, in taking a small branch instead of pursuing the main supply
of the Bay of Chaleurs), the northwest angle of Nova Scotia may be
considered as at last fixed by British authority at a point many miles
north of the point claimed to be such in the statements laid before
the King of the Netherlands on the part of Great Britain, and 48 miles
to the north of where the line of "abraded highlands" of Messrs.
Featherstonhaugh and Mudge crosses the St. John. Were it not that the
American claim would be weakened by any change in the strong ground on
which it has always rested, it might be granted that this is in fact the
long-lost northwest angle of Nova Scotia, and the highlands allowed to
be traced from that point through the sources of the branches of the
St. John and the St. Lawrence.

In proof of the position now assigned to this angle of New Brunswick,
and consequently of ancient Nova Scotia, in the absence of documents
which the archives of Great Britain alone can furnish, the map published
by the Society for the Encouragement of Useful Knowledge, the several
maps of the surveyor-general of the Province of Canada, and the most
recent map of the Provinces of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick, by John
Wyld, geographer to the Queen of Great Britain, may be cited.

It may therefore be concluded that the northwest angle of Nova Scotia
is no longer an unknown point. It can be found by a search conducted
in compliance with the proclamation of 1763 and the contemporaneous
commission of Governor Wilmot, and the researches of the present
commission show that it can not be far distant from the point originally
assigned to it in the exploring meridian line. The identity of the first
of these documents with the boundary of the treaty of 1783 is admitted,
and the latter is word for word the same with the description of the
eastern boundary of the United States in the same treaty. Moreover, a
northwest angle has been assigned to the Province of New Brunswick by
British authority, which, did it involve no dereliction of principle,
might without sensible loss be accepted on the part of the United
States.


IV.--HIGHLANDS OF THE TREATY OF 1783.

The highlands of the treaty of 1783 are described as those "which divide
those rivers that empty themselves into the river St. Lawrence from
those which fall into the Atlantic Ocean." It has been uniformly and
consistently maintained on the part of the United States that by the
term "highlands" was intended what is in another form of the same words
called the height of land. The line of highlands in this sense was to be
sought by following the rivers described in the treaty to their source
and drawing lines between these sources in such manner as to divide the
surface waters. It was believed that the sources of such rivers as the
Connecticut and the St. John must lie in a country sufficiently elevated
to be entitled to the epithet of highlands, although it should appear on
reaching it that it had the appearance of a plain. Nay, it was even
concluded, although, as now appears, incorrectly--and it was not feared
that the conclusion would weaken the American argument--that the line
from the northwest angle of Nova Scotia, at least as far as the sources
of Tuladi, did pass through a country of that description. Opposite
ground was taken in the argument of Great Britain by her agent, but
however acute and ingenious were the processes of reasoning by which
this argument was supported, it remained in his hands without
application, for the line claimed by him on the part of his Government
was one having the same physical basis for its delineation as that
claimed by the agent of the United States, namely, one joining the
culminating points of the valleys in which streams running in opposite
directions took their rise. The argument appears to have been drawn
while he hoped to be able to include Katahdin and the other great
mountains in that neighborhood in his claimed boundary, and he does not
appear to have become aware how inapplicable it was in every sense to
the line by which he was, for want of a better, compelled to abide.
The British Government, however, virtually abandoned the construction
of their agent in the convention signed in London the 27th September,
1827.[55]

[Footnote 55: See Note IX, p. 148.]

In this it was stipulated that Mitchell's and Map A should be admitted
to the exclusion of all others "as the only maps that shall be
considered as evidence" of the topography of the country, and in the
latter of these maps, constructed under the joint direction of the
British and American negotiators by the astronomer of the British
Government, it was agreed that nothing but the water courses should
be represented. Finally, it was admitted in the report of Messrs.
Featherstonhaugh and Mudge that the terms highlands and height of land
are identical. The decision of the King of the Netherlands, to which
Great Britain gave her assent in the first instance, recognizes the
correctness of the views entertained in the American statements.[56]
All discussion on this subject is, however, rendered unnecessary by the
knowledge which the undersigned have obtained of the country. The line
surveyed by them not only divides rivers, but possesses in a preeminent
degree the character by which in the British argument highlands are
required to be distinguished.

[Footnote 56: See Note X, pp. 148, 149.]

It is sufficient for the present argument that the identity of the
lines pointed out by the proclamation of 1763 and the act of 1774 with
the boundary of the treaty of 1783 be admitted. Such has been the
uniform claim of the Government of the United States and the State
of Massachusetts, and such is the deliberate verdict of the British
commissioners.[57] The words of the proclamation of 1763 have already
been cited. By reference to them it will be seen that the origin of "the
highlands" is to be sought on the _north_ shore of the Bay of Chaleurs.
If they are not to be found there, a gap exists in the boundary of the
proclamation, which it is evident could not have been intended. It has
been thought by some that the gap did actually exist, but this idea was
founded on an imperfect knowledge of the country. The Bay of Chaleurs
seems, in fact, to have been better known to the framers of the
proclamation of 1763 and the act of 1774 than to any subsequent
authorities, whether British or American. Researches made in the year
1840 show that at the head of the tide of the Bay of Chaleurs a mountain
rises immediately on the northern bank, which from its imposing
appearance has been called by the Scotch settlers at its foot Ben
Lomond. This, indeed, has by measurement been found to be no more than
1,024 feet in height, but no one can deny its title to the name of a
highland. From this a continuous chain of heights has been ascertained
to exist, bounding in the first instance the valley of the Matapediac
to the sources of that stream, which they separate from those of the
Metis. The height of land then passes between the waters of Metis and
Restigouche, and, bending around the sources of the latter to the
sources of the Rimouski, begins there to separate waters which fall into
the St. Lawrence from those which fall into the St. John, which they
continue to do as far as the point where they merge in the line admitted
by both parties.

[Footnote 57: Report of Featherstonhaugh and Mudge, pp. 6, 23.]

These highlands have all the characteristics necessary to constitute
them the highlands of the treaty. Throughout their whole northern
and western slopes flow streams which empty themselves into the St.
Lawrence. Beginning at the Bay of Chaleurs, they in the first place
divide, as it is necessary they should, waters which fall into that
bay; they next separate the waters of Restigouche from those of Metis;
they then make a great detour to the south and inclose the valley
of Rimouski, separating its waters from those of Matapediac and
Restigouche, the Green River of St. John and Tuladi; they next perform a
circuit around Lake Temiscouata, separating its basin from those of the
Otty and Trois Pistoles, until they reach the Temiscouata portage at
Mount Paradis. This portage they cross five times, and finally, bending
backward to the north, inclose the stream of the St. Francis, whose
waters they divide from those of Trois Pistoles, Du Loup, and the Green
River of the St. Lawrence. Leaving the Temiscouata portage at the
sixteenth milepost, a region positively mountainous is entered, which
character continues to the sources of the Etchemin. It there assumes for
a short space the character of a rolling country, no point in which,
however, is less than 1,200 feet above the level of the sea. It speedily
resumes a mountainous character, which continues unaltered to the
sources of the Connecticut.

Now it is maintained that all the streams and waters which have been
named as flowing from the southern and eastern sides of this line are in
the intended sense of the treaty of 1783 rivers which empty themselves
into the Atlantic. The first argument adduced in support of this
position is that the framers of that treaty, having, as is admitted,
Mitchell's map before them, speak only of two classes of rivers--those
which discharge themselves into the St. Lawrence River and those which
fall into the Atlantic Ocean; yet upon this map were distinctly seen the
St. John and the Restigouche. The latter, indeed, figures twice--once
as a tributary to the Bay of Miramichi and once as flowing to the Bay
of Chaleurs.[58] It can not reasonably be pretended that men honestly
engaged in framing an article to prevent "all disputes which might arise
in future" should have intentionally passed over and left undefined
these important rivers, when by the simplest phraseology they might have
described them had they believed that in any future time a question
could have arisen whether they were included in one or the other of the
two classes of rivers they named. Had it been intended that the due
north line should have stopped short of the St. John, the highlands
must have been described as those which divide rivers which fall into
the St. Lawrence _and the St. John_ from those which fall into the
Atlantic Ocean. The mouth of the St. Lawrence had been defined in the
proclamation of 1763 by a line drawn from the river St. John (on the
Labrador coast) to Cape Rozier. If, then, it had been intended that the
meridian line should not have crossed the Restigouche, the phraseology
must have been highlands which divide rivers which fall into the river
_and_ Gulf of St. Lawrence from those which fall into the Atlantic
Ocean. Where such obvious modes of expressing either of these intentions
existed, it is not to be believed that they would have been omitted;
but had they been proposed to be introduced the American negotiators
would have been compelled by their instructions to refuse them. Such
expressions would have prescribed a boundary different not only in
fact, but in terms, from that of the proclamation of 1763 and the
contemporaneous commission to Governor Wilmot. Either, then, the British
plenipotentiaries admitted the American claim to its utmost extent or
they fraudulently assented to terms with the intention of founding upon
them a claim to territory which if they had openly asked for must have
been denied them. The character of the British ministry under whose
directions that treaty was made forbids the belief of the latter having
been intended. The members of that ministry had been when in opposition
the constant advocates of an accommodation with the colonies or of an
honorable peace after all hopes of retaining them in their allegiance
had ceased. They showed on coming into power a laudable anxiety to put
an end to the profitless effusion of human blood, and they wisely saw
that it would be of more profit to their country to convert the new
nation into friends by the free grant of terms which sooner or later
must have been yielded than to widen the breach of kindred ties by an
irritating delay. The debates which ensued in the British Parliament
when the terms of the treaty were made known show the view which the
party that had conducted the war entertained of this question. The
giving up of the very territory now in dispute was one of the charges
made by them against their successors, and that it had been given up by
the treaty was not denied. Nay, the effect of this admission was such
as to leave the administration in a minority in the House of Commons,
and thus became at least one of the causes of the resignation of the
ministry[59] by which the treaty had been made. At this very moment more
maps than one were published in London which exhibit the construction
then put upon the treaty by the British public. The boundary exhibited
upon these maps is identical with that which the United States now claim
and have always claimed.

[Footnote 58: See Note XI, p. 149.]

[Footnote 59: Hansard's Parliamentary Register for 1783.]

The full avowal that the boundary of the treaty of 1783 and of the
proclamation of 1763 and act of 1774 are identical greatly simplifies
the second argument. It has been heretofore maintained on the part of
Great Britain that the word "sea" of the two latter-named instruments
was not changed in the first to "Atlantic Ocean" without an obvious
meaning. All discussion on this point is obviated by the admission.
But it is still maintained that the Bay of Fundy is not a part of the
Atlantic Ocean because it happens to be named in reference to the St.
Croix in the same article of the treaty. To show the extent to which
such an argument, founded on a mere verbal quibble, may be carried, let
it be supposed that at some future period two nations on the continent
of North America shall agree on a boundary in the following terms: By a
line drawn through the Mississippi from its mouth in the Gulf of Mexico
to its source; thence a parallel of latitude until it meet the highlands
which divide the waters that empty themselves into the Pacific Ocean
from those which fall into the Atlantic. Could it be pretended that
because the mouth of the Mississippi is said to be in the Gulf of
Mexico the boundary must be transferred from the Rocky Mountains to
the Alleghanies? Yet this would be as reasonable as the pretensions
so long set up by the British agents and commissioners.

It can not be denied that the line claimed by the United States fulfills
at least one of the conditions. The streams which flow from one side of
it fall without exception into the river St. Lawrence. The adverse line
claimed by Great Britain in the reference to the King of the Netherlands
divides until within a few miles of Mars Hill waters which fall into the
St. John from those of the Penobscot and Kennebec. The latter do not
discharge their waters directly into the ocean, but Sagadahock and
Penobscot bays intervene, and the former falls into the Bay of Fundy;
hence, according to the argument in respect to the Bay of Fundy, this
line fulfills neither condition.

The line of Messrs. Featherstonhaugh and Mudge is even less in
conformity to the terms of the treaty. In order to find mountains
to form a part of it they are compelled to go south of the source of
branches of the Penobscot; thence from mountains long well known, at
the sources of the Alleguash, well laid down on the rejected map of
Mr. Johnson, it becomes entangled in the stream of the Aroostook, which
it crosses more than once. In neither part does it divide waters at all.
It then, as if to make its discrepancy with the line defined in the
proclamation of 1763 apparent, crosses the St. John and extends to the
_south_ shore of the Bay of Chaleurs, although that instrument fixes the
boundary of the Province of Quebec on the north shore of the bay. In
this part of its course it divides waters which fall into the said bay
from those which fall into the St. John. But the proclamation with whose
terms this line is said to be identical directs that the highlands shall
divide waters which fall into the St. Lawrence from those which fall
into the sea. If the branches of the Bay of Chaleurs fulfill the first
condition, which, however, is denied, the St. John must fulfill the
latter. It therefore falls into the Atlantic Ocean, and as the identity
of the boundary of the treaty with that of the proclamation of 1763 and
act of 1774 is admitted, then is the St. John an Atlantic river, and the
line claimed by the United States fulfills both conditions, and is the
only line to the west of the meridian of the St. Croix which can
possibly do so.

The choice of a line different from that presented to the choice of the
King of the Netherlands is no new instance of the uncertainty which has
affected all the forms in which Great Britain has urged her claim.

In fact, nothing shows more conclusively the weakness of the ground on
which the British claim rests than the continual changes which it has
been necessary to make in order to found any feasible argument upon
it.[60] In the discussion of 1798 it was maintained on the part of Great
Britain that the meridian line must cross the St. John River; in the
argument before the commissioners under the fifth article of the treaty
of Ghent it was denied that it ever could have been the intention of the
framers of the treaty of 1783 that it should. Yet the mouthpiece by
which both arguments were delivered was one and the same person. The
same agent chose as the termination of what he attempted to represent
as a continuous range of hills an isolated mountain, Mars Hill; and
the commissioners whose report is under consideration place a range of
abraded highlands, "the maximum axis of elevation," in a region over
which British engineers have proposed to carry a railroad as the most
level and lowest line which exists between St. Andrews and Quebec.[61]

[Footnote 60: See Note XII, p. 149.]

[Footnote 61: Prospectus of St. Andrews and Quebec Railroad, 1836; and
Survey of Captain Yule, 1835.]

On the other hand, the American claim, based on the only practicable
interpretation of the treaty of 1783, has been consistent throughout:
"Let the meridian line be extended until it meets the southern boundary
of the Province of Quebec, as defined by the proclamation of 1763 and
the act of Parliament of 1774."

No argument can be drawn against the American claim from the secret
instructions of Congress dated August, 1779. All that is shown by
these instructions is the willingness to accept a more convenient
boundary--one defined by a great natural feature, and which would have
rendered the difficult operation of tracing the line of highlands and
that of determining the meridian of the St. Croix by astronomic methods
unnecessary. The words of the instructions are:

"And east by a line to be drawn along the middle of the St. John from
its source to its mouth in the Bay of Fundy, _or_ by a line to be
settled and adjusted between that part of the State of Massachusetts Bay
formerly called the Province of Maine and the colony of Nova Scotia,
agreeably to their respective rights, comprehending all islands within
20 leagues of the shores of the United States and lying between lines to
be drawn due east from the points where the aforesaid boundaries between
Nova Scotia on the one part and East Florida on the other part shall
respectively touch the Bay of Fundy and the Atlantic Ocean."

The proposal in the first alternative was to appearance a perfectly fair
one. From an estimate made by Dr. Tiarks, the astronomer of Great
Britain under the fifth article of the treaty of Ghent, in conformity
with directions from Colonel Barclay, the British commissioner, it was
ascertained that the whole disputed territory contained 10,705 square
miles; that the territory bounded by the St. John to its mouth contained
707 square miles less, or 9,998 square miles. The difference at the time
was probably believed to be insensible. The first alternative was,
however, rejected by Great Britain, and obviously on grounds connected
with a difference in supposed advantage between the two propositions.
The American commissioners were satisfied that they could urge no legal
claim along the coast beyond the river St. Croix; they therefore treated
on the other alternative in their instructions--the admitted limits
between Massachusetts and Nova Scotia. Even in the former alternative,
Nova Scotia would still have had a northwest angle, for the very use of
the term shows that by the St. John its northwestern and not the
southwestern branch was intended.

At that moment, when the interior of the country was unknown, the
adoption of the St. John as the boundary, even admitting that the
Walloostook, its southwestern branch, is the main stream, would have
given to the United States a territory of more immediate value than
that they now claim. For this very reason the proposition was instantly
rejected by Great Britain, and the State of Massachusetts was forced
to be contented with the distant region now in debate--a region then
believed to be almost inaccessible and hardly fit for human habitation.

Even now, were there not vested private rights on both sides which might
render such a plan difficult of application, the undersigned would not
hesitate to recommend that this line should be accepted in lieu of the
one which is claimed under the treaty of 1783.

It is finally obvious, from the most cursory inspection of any of the
maps of the territory in question, that the line claimed for Great
Britain in the argument before the King of the Netherlands fulfills
no more than one of the two conditions, while that of Messrs.
Featherstonhaugh and Mudge fulfills neither; and as the line claimed on
the part of the United States is denied to be capable of meeting the
terms of the treaty of 1783 by Great Britain, there is no line that,
in conformity with the British argument, can be drawn within the
disputed territory or its vicinity that will comply with either of
the conditions. This is as well and as distinctly shown in the map of
Mitchell as in the map of the British commission. It would therefore
appear, if, these views be correct, that the framers of the treaty
of 1783 went through the solemn farce of binding their respective
Governments to a boundary which they well knew did not and could not
exist.


V.--NORTHWEST HEAD OF CONNECTICUT RIVER.


The true mode of determining the most northwesterly of any two given
points need no longer be a matter of discussion. It has already been
a matter adjudicated and assented to by both Governments, in the case
of the Lake of the Woods. The point to be considered as most to the
northwest is that which a ruler laid on a map drawn according to
Mercator's projection in a direction northeast and southwest and moved
parallel to itself toward the northwest would last touch. In this view
of the subject the Eastern Branch of the Connecticut, which forms the
lake of that name, is excluded, for its source, so far from lying to the
northwest of those of the other two branches which have been explored,
actually lies to the south of the source of the Indian Stream. The
question must therefore lie between the two others, and it is as yet
impossible to decide which of them is best entitled to the epithet, as
their sources lie very nearly in the same northeast and southwest rhomb
line. Another circumstance would, however, render the decision between
them easy. The forty-fifth parallel of latitude, as laid out by the
surveyors of the Provinces of Quebec and New York in conformity with
the proclamation of 1763, crosses Halls Stream above its junction with
the united current of the other two. In this case the latter is the
Connecticut River of the treaty of 1783, and Halls Stream, which has
not yet joined it, must be excluded. The parallel, as corrected by the
united operations of the British and American astronomers under the
fifth article of the treaty of Ghent, does not touch Halls Stream, and
the Connecticut River, to which it is produced, is the united current of
the three streams. If, then, the corrected parallel should become the
boundary between the United States and the British Provinces, Halls
Stream must become one of those the claim of whose source to the title
of the north-westernmost head of Connecticut River is to be examined.
And here it may be suggested, although with the hesitation that is
natural in impeaching such high authority, that the commissioners under
the fifth article of the treaty of Ghent in all probability misconstrued
that instrument when they reopened the question of the forty-fifth
parallel. It can not be said that the forty-fifth degree of latitude had
"_not been surveyed_" when it is notorious that it had been traced and
marked throughout the whole extent from St. Regis to the bank of the
Connecticut River.

In studying, for the purpose of illustration, the history of this part
of the boundary line it will be found that a change was made in it by
the Quebec act of 1774. The proclamation of 1763 directs the forty-fifth
parallel to be continued only until it meets highlands, while in that
bill the Connecticut River is made the boundary of the Province of
Quebec. Now the earlier of these instruments was evidently founded upon
the French claim to extend their possession of Canada 10 leagues from
the St. Lawrence River, and from the citadel of Quebec, looking to the
south, are seen mountains whence rivers flow to the St. Lawrence. On
their opposite slope there was a probability that streams might flow to
the Atlantic. These mountains, however, are visibly separated from those
over which the line claimed by the United States runs by a wide gap.
This is the valley of the Chaudiere; and the St. Francis also rises on
the southeastern side of these mountains and makes its way through them.
It is not, therefore, in any sense a dividing ridge. Yet under the
proclamation of 1763 the Provinces of New York and New Hampshire claimed
and were entitled to the territory lying behind it, which is covered by
their royal charters. The Quebec act, it would appear, was intended to
divest them of it, and according to the construction of the treaty of
1783 now contended for the United States acquiesced in this diminution
of the territory of those members of the Union. If, however, it be true,
as maintained by Messrs. Featherstonhaugh and Mudge, that the highlands
seen to the south of Quebec are a portion of the ridge seen from
southeast to northeast, and if, as they maintain, so deep and wide a
valley as that of the St. John is no disruption of the continuity of
highlands, it would be possible to show that the highlands of the treaty
of 1783 are made up of these two ridges of mountains and that the United
States is entitled to the whole of the eastern townships. This range of
highlands would coincide with the terms of the proclamation of 1763 by
terminating on the north shore of the Bay of Chaleurs, while the abraded
highlands of Messrs. Featherstonhaugh and Mudge terminate on its south
shore. In fact, there is no step in their argument which might not be
adduced to support this claim, nor any apparent absurdity in preferring
it which would not find its parallel in one or other of the positions
they assume.

In this view of the history of this part of the line it becomes evident,
however, that in divesting the Provinces of New York and New Hampshire
by the Quebec act of territory admitted to belong to them in the
proclamation of 1763 the British Parliament must have intended to make
the encroachment as small as possible, and the first important branch of
the Connecticut met with in tracing the forty-fifth parallel must have
been intended. This intention is fully borne out by the words of the
treaty of 1783, which chose from among the branches of the Connecticut
that whose source is farthest to the northwest.

It has therefore been shown in the foregoing statement--

1. That the river to be considered as the St. Croix and its true source
have been designated by a solemn act, to which the good faith of the
majesty of Great Britain and of the people of the United States is
pledged, and can not now be disturbed.

2. That the boundary line must, in compliance with the provisions of the
treaty of 1783, be drawn due north from the source of that river, and in
no other direction whatever.

3. That the northwest angle of Nova Scotia was a point sufficiently
known at the date of the treaty of 1783 to be made the starting point
of the boundary of the United States; that it was both described in the
treaty and defined, without being named in previous official acts of the
British Government, in so forcible a manner that no difficulty need have
existed in finding it.

4. That the line of highlands claimed by the United States is, as the
argument on the part of Great Britain has maintained it ought to be, in
a mountainous region, while that proposed by Messrs. Featherstonhaugh
and Mudge does not possess this character; that it is also, in the sense
uniformly maintained by the United States, the height of land, which
that of Messrs. Featherstonhaugh and Mudge is not; that it fulfills in
every sense the conditions of the proclamation of 1763, the Quebec act
of 1774, and the treaty of 1783, which no other line that can possibly
be drawn in the territory in question can perform.

5. That as far as the Indian Stream and that flowing through Lake
Connecticut are concerned, the source of the former must in the sense
established by the assent of both parties be considered as the
northwestern source of the Connecticut River, but that if the old
demarcation of the forty-fifth parallel be disturbed the question must
lie between the sources of Halls and of Indian streams.

All which is respectfully submitted.

JAS. RENWICK
  JAMES D. GRAHAM,
    A. TALCOTT,
      _Commissioners_.



_Note I_.

[Treaty of 1794, Article V.]


Whereas doubts have arisen what river was truly intended under the
name of the river St. Croix mentioned in the said treaty of peace, and
forming a part of the boundary therein described, that question shall be
referred to the final decision of commissioners to be appointed in the
following manner, viz:

One commissioner shall be named by His Majesty and one by the President
of the United States, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate
thereof, and the said two commissioners shall agree on the choice of a
third, or, if they can not so agree, they shall each propose one person,
and of the two names so proposed one shall be drawn by lot in the
presence of the two original commissioners; and the three commissioners
so appointed shall be sworn impartially to examine and decide the said
question according to such evidence as shall respectively be laid before
them on the part of the British Government and of the United States.
The said commissioners shall meet at Halifax, and shall have power to
adjourn to such other place or places as they shall think fit. They
shall have power to appoint a secretary and to employ such surveyors
or other persons as they shall judge necessary. The said commissioners
shall, by a declaration under their hands and seals, decide what river
is the river St. Croix intended by the treaty. The said declaration
shall contain a description of the said river and shall particularize
the latitude and longitude of its mouth and of its source. Duplicates
of this declaration and of the statements of their accounts and of the
journal of their proceedings shall be delivered by them to the agent
of His Majesty and to the agent of the United States who may be
respectively appointed and authorized to manage the business on behalf
of the respective Governments. And both parties agree to consider such
decision as final and conclusive, so as that the same shall never
thereafter be called into question or made the subject of dispute or
difference between them.


_Note II_.

Declaration of the commissioners under the fifth article of the treaty
of 1794 between the United States and Great Britain, respecting the true
river St. Croix, by Thomas Barclay, David Howell, and Egbert Benson,
commissioners appointed in pursuance of the fifth article of the treaty
of amity, commerce, and navigation between His Britannic Majesty and the
United States of America finally to decide the question "What river was
truly intended under the name of the river St. Croix mentioned in the
treaty of peace between His Majesty and the United States, and forming
a part of the boundary therein described?"


DECLARATION.

We, the said commissioners, having been sworn impartially to examine
and decide the said question according to such evidence as should
respectively be laid before us on the part of the British Government and
of the United States, respectively, appointed and authorized to manage
the business on behalf of the respective Governments, have decided,
and hereby do decide, the river hereinafter particularly described and
mentioned to be the river truly intended under the name of the river St.
Croix in the said treaty of peace, and forming a part of the boundary
therein described; that is to say, the mouth of the said river is in
Passamaquoddy Bay at a point of land called Joes Point, about 1 mile
northward from the northern part of St. Andrews Island, and in the
latitude of 45 deg. 5' and 5" north, and in the longitude of 67 deg. 12' and 30"
west from the Royal Observatory at Greenwich, in Great Britain, and 3 deg.
54' and 15" east from Harvard College, in the University of Cambridge,
in the State of Massachusetts; and the course of the said river up from
its said mouth is northerly to a point of land called the Devils Head;
then, turning the said point, is westerly to where it divides into
two streams, the one coming from the westward and the other from the
northward, having the Indian name of Cheputnatecook, or Chebuitcook, as
the same may be variously spelt; then up the said stream so coming from
the northward to its source, which is at a stake near a yellow-birch
tree hooped with iron and marked S.T. and J.H., 1797, by Samuel Titcomb
and John Harris, the surveyors employed to survey the above-mentioned
stream coming from the northward.


_Note III_.

[Article V of the treaty of Ghent, 1814.]

Whereas neither that point of the highlands lying due north from the
source of the river St. Croix, and designated in the former treaty of
peace between the two powers as the northwest angle of Nova Scotia, nor
the northwesternmost head of Connecticut River has yet been ascertained;
and whereas that part of the boundary line between the dominions of the
two powers which extends from the source of the river St. Croix directly
north to the above-mentioned northwest angle of Nova Scotia; thence
along the said highlands which divide those rivers that empty themselves
into the river St. Lawrence from those which fall into the Atlantic
Ocean, to the northwesternmost head of Connecticut River; thence down
along the middle of that river to the forty-fifth degree of north
latitude; thence by a line due west on said latitude until it strikes
the river Iroquois, or Cataraquy, has not yet been surveyed, it is
agreed that for these several purposes two commissioners shall be
appointed, sworn, and authorized to act exactly in the manner directed
with respect to those mentioned in the next preceding article, unless
otherwise specified in the present article. The said commissioners shall
meet at St. Andrews, in the Province of New Brunswick, and shall have
power to adjourn to such other place or places as they shall think fit.
The said commissioners shall have power to ascertain and determine the
points above mentioned in conformity with the provisions of the said
treaty of peace of 1783, and shall cause the boundary aforesaid, from
the source of the river St. Croix to the river Iroquois, or Cataraquy,
to be surveyed and marked according to the said provisions. The said
commissioners shall make a map of the said boundary, and annex to it a
declaration under their hands and seals certifying it to be the true map
of the said boundary, and particularizing the latitude and longitude
of the northwest angle of Nova Scotia, of the northwesternmost head of
Connecticut River, and of such other points of the said boundary as
they may deem proper; and both parties agree to consider such map and
declaration as finally and conclusively fixing the said boundary. And in
the event of the said two commissioners differing, or both or either of
them refusing, declining, or willfully omitting to act, such reports,
declarations, or statements shall be made by them or either of them, and
such reference to a friendly sovereign or state shall be made in all
respects as in the latter part of the fourth article is contained, and
in as full a manner as if the same was herein repeated.


_Note IV_.

The point originally chosen by the commissioners in 1798 as the source
of the St. Croix was to all appearance the act of an umpire who wished
to reconcile two contending claims by giving to each party about half
the matter in dispute. No one who compares Mitchell's map with that of
Messrs. Featherstonhaugh and Mudge can fail to recognize in the St.
Croix of the former the Magaguadavic of the latter. That this was the
St. Croix intended by the framers of the treaty of 1783 was maintained,
and, it may be safely asserted, proved on the American side. On the
other hand, it was ascertained that the river called St. Croix by De
Monts was the Schoodiac; and the agent of Great Britain insisted that
the letter of the instrument was to be received as the only evidence, no
matter what might have been the intentions of the framers. The American
argument rested on the equity of the case, the British on the strict
legal interpretation of the document. The commissioners were divided in
opinion, each espousing the cause of his country. In this position of
things the umpire provided for in the treaty of 1794 was chosen, and
in the United States it has always been believed unfortunately for her
pretensions. A lawyer of eminence, who had reached the seat of a judge,
first of a State court and then of a tribunal of the General Government,
he prided himself on his freedom from the influence of feeling in his
decisions. As commissioner for the settlement of the boundary between
the States of New York and Vermont, he had offended the former, of which
he was a native, by admitting the claim of the latter in its full
extent, and it was believed that he would rather encounter the odium of
his fellow-citizens than run the risk of being charged with partiality
toward them. Colonel Barclay, the British commissioner, who concurred
in choosing him as umpire, had been his schoolfellow and youthful
associate, and it is believed in the United States that he concurred in,
if he did not prompt, the nomination from a knowledge of this feature
of character. Had he, as is insinuated by Messrs. Featherstonhaugh and
Mudge, been inclined to act with partiality toward his own country, he
had most plausible grounds for giving a verdict in her favor, and that
he did not found his decisions upon them is evidence of a determination
to be impartial, which his countrymen have said was manifested in a
leaning to the opposite side. Those who suspect him of being biased by
improper motives must either be ignorant of the circumstances of the
case or else incapable of estimating the purity of the character of
Egbert Benson. His award, however, has nothing to do with the question,
as it was never acted upon. Both parties were dissatisfied with the
conclusions at which he arrived, and in consequence a conventional
line in which both concurred was agreed upon, and the award of the
commissioners was no more than a formal act to make this convention
binding.

If, then, both Governments should think it expedient to unsettle the
vested rights which have arisen out of the award of 1798, there is a
strong and plausible ground on which the United States may claim the
Magaguadavic as their boundary, and the meridian line of its source
will throw the valley of the St. John from Woodstock to the Grand
Falls within the limits of the State of Maine. While, therefore, it
is maintained that it would violate good faith to reopen the question,
there is good reason to hope that an impartial umpire would decide it
so as to give the United States the boundary formerly claimed.


_Note V_.

The angle made by the southern boundary of the Province of Quebec with
the due north line from the source of the St. Croix first appeared in an
English dress in the commission to Governor Wilmot. This was probably
intended to be identical in its meaning with the terms in the Latin
grant to Sir William Alexander, although there is no evidence to that
effect. If, therefore, it were a false translation, the error has been
committed on the side of Great Britain, and not on that of the United
States. But it is not a false translation, as may be shown to the
satisfaction of the merest tyro in classical literature.

The words of the grant to Sir William Alexander, as quoted by Messrs.
Featherstonhaugh and Mudge, are as follows, viz:

"Omnes et singulas terras continentis ac insulas situatas et jacentes in
America intra caput seu promontorium communiter _Cap de Sable_ appellat,
jacen. prope latitudinem quadraginta trium graduum aut eo circa ab
equinoctiali linea versus septentrionem, a quo promontorio versus littus
maris tenden, ad occidentem ad stationem Sanctae Mariae navium vulgo
_Sanctmareis Bay_. Et deinceps, versus septentrionem per directam lineam
introitum sive ostium magnae illius stationis navium trajicien, quae
excurrit in terrae orientalem plagam inter regiones Suriquorum et
Etcheminorum vulgo _Suriquois_ et _Etchemines_ ad fluvium vulgo nomine
_Sanctae Crucis_ appellat. Et ad scaturiginem remotissimam sive fontem
ex occidentali parte ejusdem qui se primum predicto fluvio immiscet.
Unde per imaginariam directam lineam quae pergere per terram seu currere
versus septentrionem concipietur ad proximam navium stationem, fluvium,
vel scaturiginem in magno fluvio de Canada sese exonerantem. Et ab eo
pergendo versus orientem per maris oris littorales ejusdem fluvii de
Canada ad fluvium, stationem navium, portum, aut littus communiter
nomine de Gathepe vel Gaspee notum et appellatum."

The authentic Latin copy of the grant to Sir William Alexander, as
communicated officially by the British Government, contains no commas,
and would read as follows:

"Omnes et singulas terras continentis ac insulas situatas et jacentes in
America intra caput seu promontorium communiter Cap de Sable appellat.
Jacen. prope latitudinem quadraginta trium graduum aut eo circa ab
equinoctiali linea versus septentrionem a quo promontorio versus littus
maris tenden. ad occidentem ad stationem Sanctae Mariae navium vulgo
Sanctmareis Bay. Et deinceps versus septentrionem per directam lineam
introitum sive ostium magnae illius stationis navium trajicien. quae
excurrit in terrae orientalem plagam inter regiones Suriquorum et
Etecheminorum vulgo Suriquois et Etechemines ad fluvium vulgo nomine
Sanctae Crucis appellat. Et ad scaturiginem remotissimam sive fontem ex
occidentali parte ejusdem qui se primum predicto fluvio immiscet. Unde
per imaginariam directam lineam quae pergere per terram seu currere
versus septentrionem concipietur ad proximam navium stationem fluvium
vel scaturiginem in magno fluvio de Canada sese exonerantem. Et ab eo
pergendo versus orientem per maris oris littorales ejusdem fluvii de
Canada ad fluvium stationem navium portum aut littus communiter nomine
de Gathepe vel Gaspee notum et appellatum."

The translation of Messrs. Mudge and Featherstonhaugh is as follows:

"All and each of the lands of the continent and the islands situated
and lying in America within the headland or promontory commonly called
Cape Sable, lying near the forty-third degree of latitude from the
equinoctial line or thereabout; from which promontory stretching
westwardly toward the north by the seashore to the naval station of
St. Mary, commonly called St. Marys Bay; from thence passing toward the
north by a straight line, the entrance or mouth of that great naval
station which penetrates the interior of the eastern shore betwixt the
countries of the Suriquois and Etchemins, to the river commonly called
the St. Croix, and to the most remote source or spring of the same on
the western side which first mingles itself with the aforesaid river;
from whence, by an imaginary straight line, which may be supposed
(concipietur) to advance into the country or to run toward the north to
the nearest naval station, river, or spring discharging itself into the
great river of Canada and from thence advancing toward the east by the
gulf shores of the said river of Canada to the river, naval station,
port, or shore commonly known or called by the name of Gathepe or
Gaspe."

The only American translations which have ever been presented in
argument are as follows:

[Translation of Messrs. Gallatin and Preble, who were employed to
prepare the statement laid before the King of the Netherlands.]

"Beginning at Cape Sable, in 43 deg. north latitude or thereabout; extending
thence westwardly along the seashore to the road commonly called St.
Marys Bay; thence toward the north by a direct line, crossing the
entrance or mouth of that great ship road which runs into the eastern
tract of land between the territories of the Souriquois and of the
Etchemins (Bay of Fundy), to the river commonly called St. Croix, and
to the most remote spring or source which from the western part thereof
first mingles itself with the river aforesaid; and from thence, by an
imaginary direct line, which may be conceived to stretch through the
land or to run toward the north, to the nearest road, river, or spring
emptying itself into the great river de Canada (river St. Lawrence); and
from thence, proceeding eastwardly along the seashores of the said river
de Canada, to the river, road, port, or shore commonly known and called
by the name of Gathepe or Gaspe."

[Translation of Mr. Bradley, the American agent under the fifth article
of the treaty of Ghent.]

"By the tenor of this our present charter we do give, grant, and convey
to the said Sir William Alexander, his heirs or assigns, all and
singular the lands of the continent and islands situated and lying in
America within the headland or promontory commonly called Cape Sable,
lying near the latitude of 43 deg. or thereabout, from the equinoctial line
toward the north; from which promontory stretching toward the shore of
the sea to the west to the road of ships commonly called St. Marys Bay,
and then toward the north by a direct line, crossing the entrance or
mouth of that great road of ships which runs into the eastern tract of
land between the territories of the Souriquois and the Etchemins, to the
river called by the name of St. Croix, and to the most remote spring or
fountain from the western part thereof which first mingles itself with
the river aforesaid; whence, by an imaginary direct line, which may be
conceived to go through or run toward the north, to the nearest road of
ships, river, or spring emptying itself into the great river of Canada;
and from thence proceeding toward the east by the shores of the sea of
the said river of Canada to the river, road of ships, or shore commonly
known and called by the name of Gachepe or Gaspe."

But the translations of the Americans were merely for form's sake, as
the original Latin, in a copy furnished from a British public office,
was laid before the King of the Netherlands; and no fear need have been
felt that the umpire would not have been able to judge whether the
translations were true or not. It was rather to be inferred that he, in
examining a question submitted in a language foreign to him, would have
found the Latin quite as intelligible as the English. This examination,
however, is wholly superfluous.

From whatever source the negotiators of the treaty of 1783 derived their
view of the boundary, that instrument directs that it shall be a due
north line from the source of the river St. Croix. This expression is
too definite to require explanation or illustration, and it is only for
those purposes that any other instrument can be permitted to be quoted.

In the passages referred to the words "versus septentrionem" occur three
times, and in two of the instances are qualified by the context in such
manner as to leave no possible doubt as to the meaning. The first time
they occur the words of the passage are, "prope latitudinem quadraginta
trium graduum aut eo circa versus septentrionem." The free translation
into modern idiom is beyond doubt, "near the forty-third degree of north
latitude or thereabout;" and the direction toward the north must be
along a meridian line on which latitude is measured, or due north.
Messrs. Mudge and Featherstonhaugh, instead of connecting in their
translation the words "versus septentrionem" with the words "prope
latitudinem," etc., with which they stand in juxtaposition in the Latin
text which they quote, connect them with the words "ad occidentem
tendentem," which occur in the next clause of the sentence, even
according to their own punctuation. We note this as a false translation,
although it does not touch the point in dispute. They have, indeed,
attempted to use it in their argument; but even if the use they make
of it had been successful their inferences fall, because drawn from
erroneous premises.

The second clause in which the words occur is as follows: "Ad stationem
navium Sanctae Mariae vulgo St. Marys Bay, et deinceps versus
septentrionem per directam lineam introitum sive ostium magnae illius
stationis navium trajicientem," etc., "ad fluvium vulgo nomine Sanctae
Crucis appellatum." Here the line, although directed to be drawn toward
the north, is also directed to be drawn between two given points, and it
is clear that under the double direction, if they should differ from
each other, the position of the given points must govern, and the line
be traced from one of them to the other, no matter what may be their
bearings.

The last time the words occur is after the direction that the line shall
pass up the St. Croix and to the most remote western spring or fountain
of that stream, "unde per imaginariam lineam directam quae pergere per
terram seu currere versus septentrionem concipietur." Here alone can any
doubt exist as to the meaning of the terms, and that is easily solved.

The boundary pointed out in the instrument is "such as may be conceived
to go or run toward the north by (per) a direct (directam) line." Now a
direct line toward the north can be no other than a meridian line. Had
it been merely a straight line of vague northerly direction which was
meant, _rectum_, the usual expression for a mathematical straight line,
would have been used instead of _directam_. It is, moreover, to be
considered that the Romans had names both for the northeast and
northwest points of the compass, and that the expression "versus
septentrionem" in its most vague application could not possibly have
admitted of a deviation of more than two points on either hand. Had the
direction intended deviated more than that amount from the true north,
the Latin term corresponding to northeast or northwest must have been
used. Nor is this a matter of mere surmise, for in a passage immediately
following that which has been quoted the direction through the Gulf
of St. Lawrence toward Cape Breton is denoted by the term "versus
Euronotum," leaving no possibility of doubt that had the line directed
to be drawn from the source of the St. Croix been intended to have
a northwestern bearing the appropriate Latin words would have been
employed.

It is, besides, to be recollected that the instrument was drawn by a
person using habitually and thinking in a modern idiom, and that in
translating the English words due north into Latin no other possible
expression could suggest itself than the one employed. Such, then,
was the sense appropriately given to the Latin words, first in the
commission of Governor Wilmot and his successors, governors of Nova
Scotia, and subsequently in the commission of all the governors of New
Brunswick from the time that it was erected into a province until the
question was referred to the King of the Netherlands. In this reference,
although a translation was given in the American argument, it was not as
quoted by Messrs. Featherstonhaugh and Mudge, but was in the words which
have already been cited.

Connected with this subject, although, like it, wholly irrelevant, is
another conclusion which Messrs. Mudge and Featherstonhaugh attempt to
draw from the same grant to Sir William Alexander. That charter directs
the line "versus septentrionem" to be produced "ad proximam navium
stationem, fluvium, vel scaturiginem in magno fluvio de Canada sese
exonerantem." It can hardly be credited that, although a literal
translation of this passage is given, including the whole of the three
terms naval station, river, _or_ spring, that it is attempted to limit
the meaning to the first expression only, and to infer that as Quebec,
in their opinion, is the first naval station above Gaspe on the St.
Lawrence, the line "versus septentrionem" was intended to be drawn
toward that place, but that as "spring" is also mentioned the line
must stop at the source of the Chaudiere. Now it has been uniformly
maintained by British authorities, and most strongly in the discussion
which preceded the War of 1756, that Nova Scotia extended to the St.
Lawrence. The boundary of Sir William Alexander's grant was therefore to
be changed from a geographical line to a water course as soon as it met
with one, and the apparently useless verbiage was introduced to meet
every possible contingency. Supposing, however, that it did not extend
so far, the northwest angle of his Nova Scotia will be where the
meridian line of the St. Croix crosses the Beaver Stream running into
Lake Johnson, only a mile to the north of the point maintained by the
American claim to be such.

The map of L'Escarbot, quoted by Messrs. Mudge and Featherstonhaugh,
illustrates both this point and the second instance in which the term
"versus septentrionem" is employed. On that map, due north of the Bay
of St. Marys, a deep inlet of the Bay of Fundy is represented, and,
continuing in the same direction, a deep inlet of the St. Lawrence is
figured. The latter does not exist, but this map shows that it was
believed to exist at the time of the grant, and must be the "statio
navium" of that instrument.

This inlet of the Bay of Fundy occupies the position of the St. John,
which is almost due north by the most recent determination from St.
Marys Bay, and is so represented on their own map. That the St. John
was by mistake arising from this cause taken for the St. Croix in the
charter to Alexander is obvious from its being described as lying
between the territories of the Etchemin and Souriquois. Now Etchemin, or
canoe men, is the name given by the Micmac Indians to the race of the
Abenakis, from their skill in the management of the canoe; and this race
has always inhabited the river, whence one of their tribes is still
called St. John's Indians. The language of this tribe, although they
have lived apart for many years, is still perfectly intelligible by the
Indians of the Penobscot, and those in the service of the commission
conversed with perfect ease with the Indians of Tobique. Massachusetts,
then, was right in claiming to the St. John as the eastern limit of
the grant to Sir William Alexander, being the stream understood and
described in it under the name of St. Croix, and wholly different from
the river known to the French under that name. If, therefore, Great
Britain should insist that the question in relation to the St. Croix
shall be reopened, the United States would be able to maintain in the
very terms of the original grant to Alexander (on which the British
argument in 1797 rested) that the St. John is the St. Croix, and the
boundary will be that river to its most northwestern source, the
Asherbish, which flows into the upper end of Lake Temiscouata. Nova
Scotia will then have recovered her lost northwest angle, which can not
be found in any of the many shapes under which the British argument has
been presented, although it forms the place of beginning of what is
called a grant to the United States.


_Note VI_.

The fact that a line drawn from the source of the Kennebec to the mouth
of the Chaudiere or thereabout must be one of the boundary lines of
the grant to the Duke of York has not escaped the notice of Messrs.
Featherstonhaugh and Mudge; but they have not derived the true result
from this discovery. The Kennebec being the western limit of the grant,
the line in question bounds the territory on the southwest, while they
infer that it bounds it on the northeast. In making this inference they
appear to have forgotten that the St. Croix is the eastern boundary of
the grant. By their argument the grant to the Duke of York is blotted
wholly from the map, or, rather, becomes a mathematical line which is
absurd.


_Note VII_.

No name which has ever been applied to any part of North America is as
vague as that of Acadie. The charter to De Monts in 1604 extended from
the fortieth to the forty-sixth degree of north latitude; that is to
say, from Sandy Hook, at the mouth of the Hudson, to the peninsula of
Nova Scotia. It therefore included New York, parts of New Jersey and
Pennsylvania, and all the New England States, but excluded the disputed
territory. His settlement was at the mouth of the St. Croix, but
was speedily removed to Port Royal. The latter place was soon after
destroyed by an expedition from Virginia under Argall. Under the title
derived from this conquest it would appear probable that the celebrated
grant to Sir William Stirling was made; but when his agents attempted
to make settlements in the country they found that the French had
preoccupied it. Although the son of Alexander succeeded in conquering
the country granted to his father, and even beyond it to the Penobscot,
it was restored to France by the treaty of St. Germains in 1634, and the
Alexanders were indemnified for the loss by the Crown of England.

In the subsequent cessions to France after its occupations by the arms
of Massachusetts, and in its final cession to Great Britain by the
treaty of Utrecht in 1713, the country ceded is described as Acadie or
Nova Scotia, with its ancient bounds (_cum finibus antiquis_). The
uncertainty arising from this vague description became in 1750 a subject
of controversy between France and England, and was one of the causes
which led to the war of 1756. In this discussion both parties admitted
that the names Acadie and Nova Scotia were convertible terms. England
maintained that the territory thus named extended to the St. Lawrence;
the French, on the other hand, insisted that their Acadie had never
extended more than 10 leagues from the Bay of Fundy; while by
geographers, as quoted by the British commissioners, the name was
limited to the peninsula which forms the present Province of Nova
Scotia.[62] If Acadie had been limited to the north by the forty-sixth
degree of north latitude, as expressed in the charter of De Monts,
that parallel is to the south of Mars Hill. The British Government,
therefore, derives no title to the disputed territory from this source,
as the title of Massachusetts and of Maine as her successor is admitted
to all country south of that parallel.[63]

[Footnote 62: Report of Featherstonhaugh and Mudge, p. 8.]

[Footnote 63: It can not be seriously pretended that when by the treaty
of St. Germains, in 1632, Acadie was restored to France the intention
was to cede to her the colonies already settled in New England. Yet the
language of the British commissioners would imply that this was the case
were it not that they evidently consider the forty-sixth parallel as the
southern boundary of the grant to De Monts, whereas it is the northern.]

It is very easy to tell what country was actually settled by the French
as Acadie. Its chief town was Port Royal, now Annapolis, at the head of
the Bay of Fundy. Nearly all the settlements of the Acadians were in
that vicinity, and for the most part within the peninsula.

From these seats they were removed in 1756 by Great Britain, and to
them a remnant was permitted to return. The most western settlement of
Acadians was on the St. John River near the present site of Fredericton,
and no permanent occupation was ever made by them of country west of the
St. Croix. It is even doubtful whether the settlement near Fredericton
was a part of French Acadie, for it seems to have been formed by persons
who escaped from the general seizure and transportation of their
countrymen.

This settlement was broken up in 1783, and its inhabitants sought refuge
at Madawaska; but it can not be pretended that this forced removal of
Acadians subsequent to the treaty of 1783 was an extension of the name
of their country. The whole argument in favor of the British claim
founded on the limits of ancient Acadie therefore fails:

First. Because of the inherent vagueness of the term, on which no
settled understanding was ever had, although England held it to be
synonymous with Nova Scotia and France denied that it extended more
than 10 leagues from the Bay of Fundy.

Second. Because by its original definition in the grant to De Monts it
excludes the whole disputed territory on the one side; and

Third. Because in its practical sense, as a real settlement, it is
wholly to the east of the meridian of the St. Croix, and this excludes
the whole of the disputed territory on the other.

The portion of the territory granted to the Duke of York, and which is
now the subject of dispute, therefore can not be claimed as a part of
Acadie, as it never fell within its limits either by charter or by
occupation.


_Note VIII_.

[Extract from the award of the King of the Netherlands.]

Considering that in 1763, 1765, 1773, and 1782 it was established that
Nova Scotia should be bounded at the north as far as the western
extremity of the Bay des Chaleurs by the southern boundary of the
Province of Quebec; that this delimitation is again found with respect
to the Province of Quebec in the commission of the Governor-General of
Quebec of 1786, wherein the language of the proclamation of 1763 and of
the Quebec act of 1774 has been used, as also in the commissions of 1786
and others of subsequent dates of the governors of New Brunswick, with
respect to the last-mentioned Province, as well as in a great number
of maps anterior and posterior to the treaty of 1783; and that the
first article of the said treaty specifies by name the States whose
independence is acknowledged; but that this mention does not imply
(_implique_) the entire coincidence of the boundaries between the
two powers, as settled by the following article, with the ancient
delimitation of the British Provinces, whose preservation is not
mentioned in the treaty of 1783, and which, owing to its continual
changes and the uncertainty which continued to exist respecting it,
created from time to time differences between the provincial
authorities.


_Note IX_.

[Article IV of the convention of 1827.]

The map called Mitchell's map, by which the framers of the treaty
of 1783 are acknowledged to have regulated their joint and official
proceedings, and the Map A, which has been agreed on by the contracting
parties as a delineation of the water courses, and of the boundary lines
in reference to the said water courses, as contended for by each party,
respectively, and which has accordingly been signed by the above-named
plenipotentiaries at the same time with this convention, shall be
annexed to the statements of the contracting parties and be the only
maps that shall be considered as evidence mutually acknowledged by the
contracting parties of the topography of the country.

It shall, however, be lawful for either party to annex to its respective
first statement, for the purposes of general illustration, any of the
maps, surveys, or topographical delineations which were filed with
the commissioners under the fifth article of the treaty of Ghent,
any engraved map heretofore published, and also a transcript of the
above-mentioned Map A or of a section thereof, in which transcript each
party may lay down the highlands or other features of the country as it
shall think fit, the water courses and the boundary lines as claimed
by each party remaining as laid down in the said Map A. But this
transcript, as well as all the other maps, surveys, or topographical
delineations, other than the Map A and Mitchell's map, intended to be
thus annexed by either party to the respective statements, shall be
communicated to the other party, in the same manner as aforesaid, within
nine months after the exchange of the ratifications of this convention,
and shall be subject to such objections and observations as the other
contracting party may deem it expedient to make thereto, and shall annex
to his first statement, either in the margin of such transcript, map or
maps, or otherwise.


_Note X_.

[Extract from the award of the King of the Netherlands.]

Considering that, according to the instances alleged, the term highlands
applies not only to a hilly or elevated country, but also to land which,
without being hilly, divides waters flowing in different directions, and
that thus the character, more or less hilly and elevated, of the country
through which are drawn the two lines respectively claimed at the north
and at the south of the river St. John can not form the basis of a
choice between them.


_Note XI_.

The reason of the double delineation of the Restigouche on the map of
Mitchell and several others of ancient date is obvious. A mistake was
common to them all by which the Bay of Chaleurs was laid down too
far to the north. The main branch, or Grande Fourche, of Restigouche
(Katawamkedgwick) has been reached by parties setting out from the banks
of the St. Lawrence at Metis, and was known to fall into the Bay of
Chaleurs, while the united stream had also been visited by persons
crossing the wagansis of Grand River and descending the Southwestern
Branch. The map makers could not, in consequence of the error in
latitude, make their plat meet, and therefore considered the part of
the united streams reached in the two different directions as different
bodies of water, and without authority sought an outlet for that which
they laid down as the southernmost of the two in another bay of the Gulf
of St. Lawrence. On many of the maps, however, the small stream which
modern geographers improperly call Restigouche is readily
distinguishable under the name of Chacodi.


_Note XII_.

In the argument of the British commissioners under Jay's treaty the
following points were maintained, and, being sanctioned by the decision
of the umpire, became the grounds of an award acceded to by both
Governments:

First. That the limits of Nova Scotia had been altered from the southern
bank of the St. Lawrence to the highlands described in the treaty of
peace.

Second. That if the river Schoodiac were the true St. Croix the
northwest angle of Nova Scotia could be formed by the western and
northern boundaries (the meridian line and the highlands).

Third. That the territory of Acadie, or Nova Scotia, was, the same
territory granted to Sir William Alexander.

Fourth. That the sea and Atlantic Ocean were used as convertible terms.

Fifth. That from the date of the treaty of Utrecht the boundary between
Massachusetts and Nova Scotia was that of the patent to Sir William
Alexander.

Sixth. That the Provinces of Quebec and Nova Scotia belonged to and were
in possession of His Britannic Majesty in 1783, and that he had an
undoubted right to cede to the United States such part of them as he
might think fit.

Seventh. That the due north line from the source of the St. Croix must
of necessity cross the St. John.


It has since been maintained on the part of Great Britain:

First. That the limits of Nova Scotia never did extend to the St.
Lawrence.

Second. That the northwest angle of Nova Scotia was unknown in 1783.

Third. That Acadie extended south to the forty-sixth degree of north
latitude, and was not the same with Nova Scotia.

Fourth. That the sea and the Atlantic Ocean were different things.

Fifth. That the claims and rights of Massachusetts did not extend to the
western bounds of the grant to Sir William Alexander.

Sixth. That this being the case the cession of territory not included
within her limits is void.

Seventh. That it could never have been intended that the meridian line
should cross the St. John.


_Note XIII_.

It has been pretended that the grant of the fief of Madawaska in 1683
can be urged as a bar to the claim of Massachusetts. That fief, indeed,
was among the early grants of the French governors of Canada, but it is
not included in the claim which the French themselves set up. It was
therefore covered by the Massachusetts charter, because the grant had
never been acted upon. Even up to the present day this fief can hardly
be said to be settled or occupied except by the retainers of the
garrison of Fort Ingall, and from all the evidence which could be found
on the spot it appeared that no settlement had ever been made upon it
until the establishment of a posthouse some time between the date of the
treaties of 1783 and 1794. It therefore was not at the time the charter
of Massachusetts was granted (1691) "actually possessed or inhabited by
any other Christian prince or state."

An argument has also been attempted to be drawn from the limits given on
Greenleaf's map to a purchase made from the State of Massachusetts by
Watkins and Flint. This purchase is, however, by the patent extended to
the highlands, and the surveyors who laid it out crossed the Walloostook
in search of them. Here they met, at a short distance from that stream,
with waters running to the north, which they conceived to be waters of
the St. Lawrence, and they terminated their survey. The lines traced on
Greenleaf's map are therefore incorrect, either as compared with the
grant or the actual survey, and although from a want of knowledge of the
country the surveyors stopped at waters running into Lake Temiscouata
instead of the St. Lawrence, the very error shows the understanding they
had of the true design of the patent, and this transaction, so far from
being an available argument against the American claim, is an act of
possession at an early date within the limits of the disputed territory.



WASHINGTON, _April 8, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In compliance with your resolution of the 31st March, 1842, I have the
honor to submit the accompanying document and report[64] from the
Commissioner of the General Land Office.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 64: Relating to surveys and sales of the public lands during
1841 and 1842, etc.]



WASHINGTON, _April 9, 1842_.

_To the House of Representatives of the United States_:

I transmit herewith to the House of Representatives a report from the
Secretary of State, with a copy of the correspondence[65] requested by
their resolution of the 7th instant.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 65: With Great Britain relative to an international copyright
law.]



WASHINGTON, _April 11, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I herewith transmit a memorial[66] which I have received from the
Choctaw tribe of Indians and citizens of the State of Mississippi, with
a request that I should communicate the same to Congress. This I do not
feel myself at liberty to decline, inasmuch as I think that some action
by Congress is called for by justice to the memorialists and in
compliance with the plighted national faith.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 66: Relating to an alleged violation by the United States of
the treaty of Dancing Rabbit Creek.]



WASHINGTON, _April 12, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In further compliance with the resolution of the Senate of the 2d of
February last, requesting information touching the demarcation of the
boundary line between the United States and the Republic of Texas,
I transmit a report from the Secretary of State and the accompanying
documents.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _April 13, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In compliance with a resolution of the Senate of the 24th of July last,
I communicate to that body a report from the Secretary of State,
conveying copies of the correspondence[67] which contains the
information called for by that resolution.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 67: Of the diplomatic agent and minister of the United States
at the Court of Austria relative to the commercial interests of the
United States.]



WASHINGTON, _April 13, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In compliance with a resolution of the Senate of the 29th July last, I
communicate to that body a report from the Secretary of State, conveying
copies of the correspondence[68] which contains the information called
for by said resolution.

In communicating these papers to the Senate I call their particular
attention to that portion of the report of the Secretary of State in
which he suggests the propriety of not making public certain parts of
the correspondence which accompanied it.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 68: Between the Department of State and Belgium relative to
the rejection by that Government of the treaty ratified by the Senate
February 9, 1833, and the causes of the delay in exchanging the
ratifications of the treaty ratified by the Senate December 31, 1840.]



WASHINGTON, _April 18, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I have the honor to transmit herewith the report[69] of the Secretary
of State, in compliance with the resolution of the Senate of the 18th
February, 1842.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 69: Transmitting names of agents employed by the State
Department without express provision of law.]



WASHINGTON, _April 19, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit herewith, in part compliance with a resolution of the Senate
of February 18, a report from the Secretary of War, inclosing a list
of all officers, agents, and commissioners employed under the War
Department who are not such by express provision of law, with other
information required by the resolution.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _April 19, 1842_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I transmit herewith a report from the Secretary of War, containing a
list of appointments to office made in that Department since the 4th day
of April, 1841, in part compliance with the resolution of the House of
Representatives of the 21st ultimo.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _April 20, 1842_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States_:

I submit to Congress a report from the Secretary of State, accompanied
by documents relating to an application by the captain and owners of the
Spanish ship _Sabina_,[70] which is recommended to their favorable
consideration.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 70: For compensation for rescuing and supporting the captain,
supercargo, and 17 officers and men of the American ship _Courier_, of
New York, which foundered at sea, and landing them safely at the Cape of
Good Hope.]



WASHINGTON, _April 28, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I submit to the Senate, for the constitutional action of that body, a
treaty concluded on the 11th day of August last with the Minda Wankanton
bands of the Dakota or Sioux Nation of Indians, with the papers
necessary to an understanding of the subject.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _April 28, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I submit to the Senate, for the constitutional action of that body, a
treaty concluded with the half-breeds of the Dakota or Sioux Nation on
the 3ist day of July last, together with the papers referred to in the
accompanying communication from the Secretary of War as necessary to a
full view of the whole subject.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _April 30, 1842_.

_To the House of Representatives of the United States_:

In compliance with your resolution of the 29th instant, I have the honor
to transmit the reports of Messrs. Kelley and Steuart, two of the
commissioners originally appointed, along with Mr. Poindexter, to
investigate the affairs of the custom-house of New York, together with
all the correspondence and testimony accompanying the same, and also the
report of Mr. Poindexter, to which is annexed two letters, subscribed by
Mr. Poindexter and Mr. Bradley. The last-named gentleman was substituted
in the place of Mr. Kelley, whose inclinations and duties called him to
his residence in Ohio after the return of the commissioners to this
city, about the last of August. One of the letters just mentioned was
addressed to the Secretary of the Treasury and bears date the 12th of
April instant, and the other to myself, dated the 20th of this month.
From the former you will learn that a most interesting portion of
the inquiry instituted by this Department (viz, that relating to
light-houses, buoys, beacons, revenue cutters, and revenue boats) is
proposed to be made the subject of a further report by Messrs. Bradley
and Poindexter. You will also learn, through the accompanying letter
from Mr. Steuart, the reasons which have delayed him in making a
supplemental and additional report to that already made by himself and
Mr. Kelley, embracing his views and opinions upon the developments made
subsequent to the withdrawal of Mr. Kelley from the commission and the
substitution of Mr. Bradley in his place. I also transmit two documents
furnished by Mr. Steuart, and which were handed by him to the Secretary
of the Treasury on the 7th instant, the one being "memoranda of
proceedings," etc., marked No. 1, and the other "letters accompanying
memoranda," etc., marked No. 2.

The commission was instituted for the purpose of ascertaining existing
defects in the custom-house regulations, to trace to their true causes
past errors, to detect abuses, and by wholesome reforms to guard
in future not only against fraud and peculation, but error and
mismanagement. For these purposes a selection was made of persons of
acknowledged intelligence and industry, and upon this task they have
been engaged for almost an entire year, and their labors remain yet to
be completed. The character of those labors may be estimated by the
extent of Messrs. Kelley and Steuart's report, embracing about 100
pages of closely written manuscript, the voluminous memoranda and
correspondence of Mr. Steuart, the great mass of evidence accompanying
Messrs. Kelley and Steuart's report, and the report of Mr. Poindexter,
extending over 394 pages, comprised in the volume accompanying this,
and additional reports still remaining to be made, as before stated.

I should be better pleased to have it in my power to communicate the
entire mass of reports made and contemplated to be made at one and the
same time, and still more should I have been gratified if time could
have been allowed me, consistently with the apparent desire of the House
of Representatives to be put into immediate possession of these papers,
to have compared or even to have read with deliberation the views
presented by the commissioners as to proposed reforms in the revenue
laws, together with the mass of documentary evidence and information by
which they have been explained and enforced and which do not admit of a
satisfactory comparison until the whole circle of reports be completed.
Charges of malfeasance against some of those now in office will devolve
upon the Executive a rigid investigation into their extent and
character, and will in due season claim my attention. The readiness,
however, with which the House proposes to enter upon the grave and
difficult subjects which these papers suggest having anticipated that
consideration of them by the Executive which their importance demands,
it only remains for me, in lieu of specific recommendations, which under
other circumstances it would have been my duty to make, to urge upon
Congress the importance and necessity of introducing the earliest
reforms in existing laws and usages, so as to guard the country in
future against frauds in the collection of the revenues and the Treasury
against peculation, to relieve trade and commerce from oppressive
regulations, and to guard law and morality against violation and abuse.

As from their great volume it has been necessary to transmit the
original papers to the House, I have to suggest the propriety of the
House taking order for their restoration to the Treasury Department
at such time as may comport with its pleasure.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _May 2, 1842_.

_To the House of Representatives of the United States_:

I have this day received and now transmit to the House of
Representatives the accompanying communication from Benjamin F. Butler,
having relation to the reports of the commissioners appointed by me to
examine into the affairs connected with the New York custom-house. As
the whole subject is in possession of the House, I deem it also proper
to communicate Mr. Butler's letter.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _May 10, 1842_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:

The season for active hostilities in Florida having nearly terminated,
my attention has necessarily been directed to the course of measures to
be pursued hereafter in relation to the few Indians yet remaining in
that Territory. Their number is believed not to exceed 240, of whom
there are supposed to be about 80 warriors, or males capable of bearing
arms. The further pursuit of these miserable beings by a large military
force seems to be as injudicious as it is unavailing. The history
of the last year's campaign in Florida has satisfactorily shown that
notwithstanding the vigorous and incessant operations of our troops
(which can not be exceeded), the Indian mode of warfare, their dispersed
condition, and the very smallness of their number (which increases the
difficulty of finding them in the abundant and almost inaccessible
hiding places of the Territory) render any further attempt to secure
them by force impracticable except by the employment of the most
expensive means. The exhibition of force and the constant efforts
to capture or destroy them of course places them beyond the reach of
overtures to surrender. It is believed by the distinguished officer in
command there that a different system should now be pursued to attain
the entire removal of all the Indians in Florida, and he recommends
that hostilities should cease unless the renewal of them be rendered
necessary by new aggressions; that communications should be opened by
means of the Indians with him to insure them a peaceful and voluntary
surrender, and that the military operations should hereafter be directed
to the protection of the inhabitants.

These views are strengthened and corroborated by the governor of the
Territory, by many of its most intelligent citizens, and by numerous
officers of the Army who have served and are still serving in that
region. Mature reflection has satisfied me that these recommendations
are sound and just; and I rejoice that consistently with duty to Florida
I may indulge my desire to promote the great interests of humanity and
extend the reign of peace and good will by terminating the unhappy
warfare that has so long been carried on there, and at the same time
gratify my anxiety to reduce the demands upon the Treasury by curtailing
the extraordinary expenses which have attended the contest. I have
therefore authorized the colonel in command there as soon as he shall
deem it expedient to declare that hostilities against the Indians have
ceased, and that they will not be renewed unless provoked and rendered
indispensable by new outrages on their part, but that neither citizens
nor troops are to be restrained from any necessary and proper acts of
self-defense against any attempts to molest them. He is instructed to
open communications with those yet remaining, and endeavor by all
peaceable means to persuade them to consult their true interests by
joining their brethren at the West; and directions have been given for
establishing a cordon or line of protection for the inhabitants by the
necessary number of troops.

But to render this system of protection effectual it is essential
that settlements of our citizens should be made within the line so
established, and that they should be armed, so as to be ready to repel
any attack. In order to afford inducements to such settlements, I submit
to the consideration of Congress the propriety of allowing a reasonable
quantity of land to the head of each family that shall permanently
occupy it, and of extending the existing provisions on that subject so
as to permit the issue of rations for the subsistence of the settlers
for one year; and as few of them will probably be provided with arms, it
would be expedient to authorize the loan of muskets and the delivery of
a proper quantity of cartridges or of powder and balls. By such means it
is to be hoped that a hardy population will soon occupy the rich soil of
the frontiers of Florida, who will be as capable as willing to defend
themselves and their houses, and thus relieve the Government from
further anxiety or expense for their protection.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _May 13, 1842_.

_To the House of Representatives of the United States_:

I transmit herewith a report[71] from the Postmaster-General, made in
pursuance of the resolution of the House of Representatives of the 21st
of March last, together with the accompanying documents.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 71: Transmitting lists of postmasters and others appointed by
the President and Post-Office Department from April 4, 1841, to March
21, 1842.]



WASHINGTON, _May 16, 1842_.

_To the Senate_:

Having directed hostilities in Florida to cease, the time seems to have
arrived for distinguishing with appropriate honors the brave army that
have so long encountered the perils of savage warfare in a country
presenting every imaginable difficulty and in seasons and under a
climate fruitful of disease. The history of the hardships which our
soldiers have endured, of the patience and perseverance which have
enabled them to triumph over obstacles altogether unexampled, and of the
gallantry which they have exhibited on every occasion which a subtle
and skulking foe would allow them to improve is so familiar as not to
require repetition at my hands. But justice to the officers and men now
in Florida demands that their privations, sufferings, and dauntless
exertions during a summer's campaign in such a climate, which for the
first time was witnessed during the last year, should be specially
commended. The foe has not been allowed opportunity either to plant or
to cultivate or to reap. The season, which to him has usually been one
of repose and preparation for renewed conflict, has been vigorously
occupied by incessant and harassing pursuit, by penetrating his hiding
places and laying waste his rude dwellings, and by driving him from
swamp to swamp and from everglade to everglade. True, disease and death
have been encountered at the same time and in the same pursuit, but
they have been disregarded by a brave and gallant army, determined on
fulfilling to the uttermost the duties assigned them, however inglorious
they might esteem the particular service in which they were engaged.

To all who have been thus engaged the executive department, responding
to the universal sentiment of the country, has already awarded the meed
of approbation. There must, however, in all such cases be some who,
availing themselves of the occasions which fortune afforded, have
distinguished themselves for "gallant actions and meritorious conduct"
beyond the usual high gallantry and great merit which an intelligent
public opinion concedes to the whole Army. To express to these the sense
which their Government cherishes of their public conduct and to hold up
to their fellow-citizens the bright example of their courage, constancy,
and patriotic devotion would seem to be but the performance of the very
duty contemplated by that provision of our laws which authorizes the
issuing of brevet commissions.

Fortunately for the country, a long peace, interrupted only by
difficulties with Indians at particular points, has afforded few
occasions for the exercise of this power, and it may be regarded as
favorable to the encouragement of a proper military spirit throughout
the Army that an opportunity is now given to evince the readiness of the
Government to reward unusual merit with a peculiar and lasting
distinction.

I therefore nominate to the Senate the persons whose names are contained
in the accompanying list[72] for brevet commissions for services in
Florida. That the number is large is evidence only of the value of the
services rendered during a contest that has continued nearly as long as
the War of the Revolution. The difficulty has been to reduce the number
as much as possible without injustice to any, and to accomplish this
great and mature consideration has been bestowed on the case of every
officer who has served in Florida.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 72: Omitted.]



WASHINGTON, _May 24, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit herewith to the Senate a treaty recently concluded with the
Wyandott tribe of Indians, and request the advice and consent of the
Senate to the ratification of the same as proposed to be modified by the
War Department.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _June 1, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I herewith transmit a report from the Acting Commissioner of the General
Land Office and the documents accompanying the same (from No. 1 to No.
7), in relation to the conduct of N.P. Taylor, present register and
former clerk in the land office at St. Louis, in compliance with your
resolution of the 9th May.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _June 10, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I submit herewith a treaty concluded at Buffalo Creek on the 20th day of
May last between the United States and the Seneca Nation of Indians, for
your advice and consent to its ratification, together with a report on
the subject from the War Department.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _June 13, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In compliance with a resolution of the Senate of the 2d of March last,
requesting information touching proceedings under the convention of the
11th of April, 1839, between the United States and the Mexican Republic,
I transmit a report from the Secretary of State, with the accompanying
documents.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _June 15, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In compliance with the resolution of the Senate of the 29th of March
last, calling for information touching the relations between the United
States and the Mexican Republic, I transmit a report from the Secretary
of State, with the accompanying documents.[73]

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 73: Correspondence respecting certain citizens of the United
States captured with the Texan expedition to Santa Fe, and held in
confinement in Mexico.]



WASHINGTON, _June 17, 1842_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I herewith transmit a report from the Secretary of the Treasury, which,
accompanied by copies of certain letters of Mr. Ewing, late Secretary
of the Treasury, and a statement[74] from the Treasury Department,
completes the answer, a part of which has heretofore been furnished, to
your resolution of the 7th of February last, and complies also with your
resolution of the 3d instant.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 74: Of expenses of the commission to investigate the New York
custom-house, etc.]



WASHINGTON, _June 20, 1842_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

A resolution of the House of Representatives of the 13th instant has
been communicated to me, requesting, "so far as may be compatible with
the public interest, a copy of the quintuple treaty between the five
powers of Europe for the suppression of the African slave trade, and
also copies of any remonstrance or protest addressed by Lewis Cass,
envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary of the United States
at the Court of France, to that Government, against the ratification
by France of the said treaty, and of all correspondence between
the Governments of the United States and of France, and of all
communications from the said Lewis Cass to his own Government and
from this Government to him relating thereto."

In answer to this request I have to say that the treaty mentioned
therein has not been officially communicated to the Government of the
United States, and no authentic copy of it, therefore, can be furnished.
In regard to the other papers requested, although it is my hope and
expectation that it will be proper and convenient at an early day to lay
them before Congress, together with others connected with the same
subjects, yet in my opinion a communication of them to the House of
Representatives at this time would not be compatible with the public
interest.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _June 22, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In compliance with a resolution of the Senate of the 15th of April last,
I communicate to the Senate a report from the Secretary of State,
accompanying copies of the correspondence[75] called for by said
resolution.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 75: Relating to the conduct and character of William B.
Hodgson (nominated to be consul at Tunis) while dragoman at
Constantinople.]



WASHINGTON, _June 24, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit herewith to the Senate the translation of a letter[76]
addressed by the minister of France at Washington to the Secretary of
State of the United States and a copy of the answer given thereto by my
direction, and invite to the subject of the minister's letter all the
consideration due to its importance and to a proposition originating in
a desire to promote mutual convenience and emanating from a Government
with which it is both our interest and our desire to maintain the most
amicable relations.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 76: Relating to the establishment of a line of steamers
between Havre and New York.]

[The same message was sent to the House of Representatives.]



WASHINGTON, _June 24, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In compliance with the resolution of the Senate of the 16th of February
last, I herewith transmit a letter[77] from the Secretary of State and
the papers in that Department called for by the resolution aforesaid.

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 77: Transmitting names and compensation of employees and
witnesses in connection with the commission of inquiry relative to
the public buildings in Washington, D.C.]



WASHINGTON, _June 25, 1842_.

_To the House of Representatives_:

I have this day approved and signed an act, which originated in the
House of Representatives, entitled "An act for an apportionment of
Representatives among the several States according to the Sixth Census,"
and have caused the same to be deposited in the office of the Secretary
of State, accompanied by an exposition of my reasons for giving to it my
sanction.

JOHN TYLER.

[Transmitted to the House of Representatives by the Secretary of State
in compliance with a resolution of that body.]



WASHINGTON, _June 25,1842_.

A BILL entitled "An act for an apportionment of Representatives among
the several States according to the Sixth Census," approved June 25, 1842.

In approving this bill I feel it due to myself to say, as well that my
motives for signing it may be rightly understood as that my opinions may
not be liable to be misconstrued or quoted hereafter erroneously as a
precedent, that I have not proceeded so much upon a _clear and decided
opinion of my own_ respecting the constitutionality or policy of the
entire act as from respect to the declared will of the two Houses of
Congress.

In yielding _my doubts_ to the matured opinion of Congress I have
followed the advice of the first Secretary of State to the first
President of the United States and the example set by that illustrious
citizen upon a memorable occasion.

When I was a member of either House of Congress I acted under the
conviction that _to doubt_ as to the constitutionality of a law was
sufficient to induce me to give my vote against it; but I have not been
able to bring myself to believe that _a doubtful opinion_ of the Chief
Magistrate ought to outweigh the solemnly pronounced opinion of the
representatives of the people and of the States.

One of the prominent features of the bill is that which purports
to be mandatory on the States to form districts for the choice of
Representatives to Congress, in single districts. That Congress itself
has power by law to alter State regulations respecting the manner of
holding elections for Representatives is clear, but its power to command
the States to make new regulations or alter their existing regulations
is the question upon which I have felt deep and strong doubts. I have
yielded those doubts, however, to the opinion of the Legislature, giving
effect to their enactment as far as depends on my approbation, and
leaving questions which may arise hereafter, if unhappily such should
arise, to be settled by full consideration of the several provisions of
the Constitution and the laws and the authority of each House to judge
of the elections, returns, and qualifications of its own members.

Similar considerations have operated with me in regard to the
representation of fractions above a moiety of the representative number,
and where such moiety exceeds 30,000--a question on which a diversity of
opinion has existed from the foundation of the Government. The provision
recommends itself from its nearer approximation to equality than would
be found in the application of a common and simple divisor to the
entire population of each State, and corrects in a great degree those
inequalities which are destined at the recurrence of each succeeding
census so greatly to augment.

In approving the bill I flatter myself that a disposition will be
perceived on my part to concede to the opinions of Congress in a matter
which may conduce to the good of the country and the stability of its
institutions, upon which my own opinion is not clear and decided.
But it seemed to me due to the respectability of opinion against the
constitutionality of the bill, as well as to the real difficulties
of the subject, which no one feels more sensibly than I do, that the
reasons which have determined me should be left on record.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _July 1, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In pursuance of the suggestions contained in the accompanying letter
from the Secretary of the Navy and of my own convictions of their
propriety, I transmit to the Senate the report made by Lieutenant
Wilkes, commander of the exploring expedition, relative to the Oregon
Territory. Having due regard to the negotiations now pending between
this Government and the Government of Great Britain through its special
envoy, I have thought it proper to communicate the report confidentially
to the Senate.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _July 2, 1842_.

_To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States_:

I submit to Congress the printed copy of certain resolutions of the
legislature of the State of Louisiana, accompanied by a letter from the
Senators and Representatives from that State, and also a letter from the
Solicitor of the Treasury and Commissioner of the General Land Office,
requesting and recommending that a suit in ejectment may be authorized
and directed in order to test the validity of a grant made on the 20th
of June, 1797, by the Baron de Carondelet, Governor-General of
Louisiana, to the Marquis de Maison Rouge.

The magnitude of this claim renders it highly desirable that a speedy
termination should be put to all contest concerning it, and I therefore
recommend that Congress shall authorize such proceedings as may be best
calculated to bring it to a close.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _July 9, 1842_.

_To the House of Representatives of the United States_:

In compliance with the resolution of the House of Representatives of
the 21st ultimo, requesting information relative to proceedings of this
Government in the case of George Johnson, a citizen of the United States
aggrieved by acts of authorities of the Republic of Uruguay, I transmit
a report from the Secretary of State with the accompanying Papers.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _July 14, 1842_.

_To the House of Representatives of the United States_:

In answer to the resolution of the House of Representatives of the 12th
instant, requesting copies of papers upon the subject of the relations
between the United States and the Mexican Republic, I transmit a report
from the Secretary of State and the documents by which it was
accompanied.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _July 14, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In compliance with the resolution of the Senate of the 11th instant,
calling for the recent correspondence between the Republic of Mexico and
this Government in relation to Texas, I transmit a report from the
Secretary of State, with the accompanying documents.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _July 20, 1842_.

_To the House of Representatives of the United States_:

In further compliance with the resolution of the House of
Representatives of the 29th of April last, I transmit herewith a
supplemental and additional report of William M. Steuart, one of the
commissioners appointed to investigate the affairs of the New York
custom-house, which has recently been received, and which, like the
reports of the commissioners heretofore communicated to the House, I
have not had an opportunity to examine. For the reason stated in my
message to the House of the 30th of April last, I shall abstain, as I
have done hitherto, from recommending any specific measures which might
be suggested by an examination of the various reports on the subject.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _July 22, 1842_.

_To the House of Representatives of the United States_:

In answer to the resolution of the House of Representatives of the
13th instant, upon the subject of the relations between the United
States and the Republic of Texas, I transmit a report from the Secretary
of State. My last communication to Congress relating to that Republic
was my message of the 30th of March last, suggesting the expediency
of legislative provisions for improving the trade and facilitating
the intercourse by post between the United States and Texas. The
report of the Secretary of State is accompanied by a copy of all the
correspondence between the two Governments since that period which it
would be compatible with the public interest to communicate to the
House of Representatives at this time.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _August 8, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In the communication made to the Senate on the 13th of June, in answer
to its resolution of the 2d of March last, there appears to have been,
among other papers, sundry letters addressed to the Department of State
by certain claimants or their agents containing reflections upon the
character of the umpire appointed by His Prussian Majesty pursuant to
the convention between the United States and the Mexican Republic of the
11th of April, 1839. As the call was for all communications which had
been addressed to the Department of State by any of the claimants under
that convention relative to the proceedings and progress of the mixed
commission, the copies were prepared and submitted without attracting
the attention either of the head of the Department or myself. If those
letters had been noticed, their transmission to the Senate, if
transmitted at all, would have been accompanied by a disclaimer on the
part of the Executive of any intention to approve such charges. The
Executive has no complaint to make against the conduct or decisions of
the highly respectable person appointed by his sovereign umpire between
the American and Mexican commissioners.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _August 10, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

In compliance with your resolution of the 18th July, I herewith transmit
a letter from the Acting Secretary of the Treasury and a report from the
Commissioner of Public Buildings, together with the accompanying
documents.[78]

JOHN TYLER.

[Footnote 78: Relating to the macadamizing of Pennsylvania Avenue,
Washington D.C.]



WASHINGTON, _August 11, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I have the satisfaction to communicate to the Senate the results of
the negotiations recently had in this city with the British minister,
special and extraordinary.

These results comprise--

First. A treaty to settle and define the boundaries between the
territories of the United States and the possessions of Her Britannic
Majesty in North America, for the suppression of the African slave
trade, and the surrender of criminals fugitive from justice in certain
cases.

Second. A correspondence on the subject of the interference of the
colonial authorities of the British West Indies with American merchant
vessels driven by stress of weather or carried by violence into the
ports of those colonies.

Third. A correspondence upon the subject of the attack and destruction
of the steamboat _Caroline_.

Fourth. A correspondence on the subject of impressment.

If this treaty shall receive the approbation of the Senate, it will
terminate a difference respecting boundary which has long subsisted
between the two Governments, has been the subject of several ineffectual
attempts at settlement, and has sometimes led to great irritation, not
without danger of disturbing the existing peace. Both the United States
and the States more immediately concerned have entertained no doubt of
the validity of the American title to all the territory which has been
in dispute, but that title was controverted and the Government of the
United States had agreed to make the dispute a subject of arbitration.
One arbitration had been actually had, but had failed to settle the
controversy, and it was found at the commencement of last year that a
correspondence had been in progress between the two Governments for a
joint commission, with an ultimate reference to an umpire or arbitrator
with authority to make a final decision. That correspondence, however,
had been retarded by various occurrences, and had come to no definite
result when the special mission of Lord Ashburton was announced. This
movement on the part of England afforded in the judgment of the
Executive a favorable opportunity for making an attempt to settle this
long-existing controversy by some agreement or treaty without further
reference to arbitration.

It seemed entirely proper that if this purpose were entertained
consultation should be had with the authorities of the States of
Maine and Massachusetts. Letters, therefore, of which copies are
herewith communicated, were addressed to the governors of those States,
suggesting that commissioners should be appointed by each of them,
respectively, to repair to this city and confer with the authorities
of this Government on a line by agreement or compromise, with its
equivalents and compensations. This suggestion was met by both States
in a spirit of candor and patriotism and promptly complied with.
Four commissioners on the part of Maine and three on the part of
Massachusetts, all persons of distinction and high character, were duly
appointed and commissioned and lost no time in presenting themselves at
the seat of the Government of the United States. These commissioners
have been in correspondence with this Government during the period of
the discussions; have enjoyed its confidence and freest communications;
have aided the general object with their counsel and advice, and in the
end have unanimously signified their assent to the line proposed in the
treaty.

Ordinarily it would be no easy task to reconcile and bring together such
a variety of interests in a matter in itself difficult and perplexed,
but the efforts of the Government in attempting to accomplish this
desirable object have been seconded and sustained by a spirit of
accommodation and conciliation on the part of the States concerned,
to which much of the success of these efforts is to be ascribed.

Connected with the settlement of the line of the northeastern boundary,
so far as it respects the States of Maine and Massachusetts, is the
continuation of that line along the highlands to the northwesternmost
head of Connecticut River. Which of the sources of that stream is
entitled to this character has been matter of controversy and of some
interest to the State of New Hampshire. The King of the Netherlands
decided the main branch to be the northwesternmost head of the
Connecticut. This did not satisfy the claim of New Hampshire. The line
agreed to in the present treaty follows the highlands to the head of
Halls Stream and thence down that river, embracing the whole claim of
New Hampshire and establishing her title to 100,000 acres of territory
more than she would have had by the decision of the King of the
Netherlands.

By the treaty of 1783 the line is to proceed down the Connecticut
River to the forty-fifth degree of north latitude, and thence west by
that parallel till it strikes the St. Lawrence. Recent examinations
having ascertained that the line heretofore received as the true line of
latitude between those points was erroneous, and that the correction of
this error would not only leave on the British side a considerable tract
of territory heretofore supposed to belong to the States of Vermont and
New York, but also Rouses Point, the site of a military work of the
United States, it has been regarded as an object of importance not only
to establish the rights and jurisdiction of those States up to the line
to which they have been considered to extend, but also to comprehend
Rouses Point within the territory of the United States. The
relinquishment by the British Government of all the territory south of
the line heretofore considered to be the true line has been obtained,
and the consideration for this relinquishment is to inure by the
provisions of the treaty to the States of Maine and Massachusetts.

The line of boundary, then, from the source of the St. Croix to the St.
Lawrence, so far as Maine and Massachusetts are concerned, is fixed by
their own consent and for considerations satisfactory to them, the chief
of these considerations being the privilege of transporting the lumber
and agricultural products grown and raised in Maine on the waters of the
St. Johns and its tributaries down that river to the ocean free from
imposition or disability. The importance of this privilege, perpetual
in its terms, to a country covered at present by pine forests of great
value, and much of it capable hereafter of agricultural improvement, is
not a matter upon which the opinion of intelligent men is likely to be
divided.

So far as New Hampshire is concerned, the treaty secures all that she
requires, and New York and Vermont are quieted to the extent of their
claim and occupation. The difference which would be made in the northern
boundary of these two States by correcting the parallel of latitude may
be seen on Tanner's maps (1836), new atlas, maps Nos. 6 and 9.

From the intersection of the forty-fifth degree of north latitude
with the St. Lawrence and along that river and the lakes to the water
communication between Lake Huron and Lake Superior the line was
definitively agreed on by the commissioners of the two Governments
under the sixth article of the treaty of Ghent; but between this
last-mentioned point and the Lake of the Woods the commissioners acting
under the seventh article of that treaty found several matters of
disagreement, and therefore made no joint report to their respective
Governments. The first of these was Sugar Island, or St. Georges Island,
lying in St. Marys River, or the water communication between Lakes Huron
and Superior. By the present treaty this island is embraced in the
territories of the United States. Both from soil and position it is
regarded as of much value.

Another matter of difference was the manner of extending the line from
the point at which the commissioners arrived, north of Isle Royale,
in Lake Superior, to the Lake of the Woods. The British commissioner
insisted on proceeding to Fond du Lac, at the southwest angle of the
lake, and thence by the river St. Louis to the Rainy Lake. The American
commissioner supposed the true course to be to proceed by way of the Dog
River. Attempts were made to compromise this difference, but without
success. The details of these proceedings are found at length in the
printed separate reports of the commissioners.

From the imperfect knowledge of this remote country at the date of
the treaty of peace, some of the descriptions in that treaty do not
harmonize with its natural features as now ascertained. "Long Lake" is
nowhere to be found under that name. There is reason for supposing,
however, that the sheet of water intended by that name is the estuary
at the mouth of Pigeon River. The present treaty therefore adopts that
estuary and river, and afterwards pursues the usual route across the
height of land by the various portages and small lakes till the line
reaches Rainy Lake, from which the commissioners agreed on the extension
of it to its termination in the northwest angle of the Lake of the
Woods. The region of country on and near the shore of the lake between
Pigeon River on the north and Fond du Lac and the river St. Louis on
the south and west, considered valuable as a mineral region, is thus
included within the United States. It embraces a territory of 4,000,000
acres northward of the claim set up by the British commissioner under
the treaty of Ghent. From the height of land at the head of Pigeon River
westerly to the Rainy Lake the country is understood to be of little
value, being described by surveyors and marked on the map as a region
of rock and water.

From the northwest angle of the Lake of the Woods, which is found to be
in latitude 45 deg. 23' 55" north, existing treaties require the line to be
run due south to its intersection with the forty-fifth parallel, and
thence along that parallel to the Rocky Mountains.

After sundry informal communications with the British minister upon the
subject of the claims of the two countries to territory west of the
Rocky Mountains, so little probability was found to exist of coming
to any agreement on that subject at present that it was not thought
expedient to make it one of the subjects of formal negotiation to be
entered upon between this Government and the British minister as part
of his duties under his special mission.

By the treaty of 1783 the line of division along the rivers and lakes
from the place where the forty-fifth parallel of north latitude strikes
the St. Lawrence to the outlet of Lake Superior is invariably to be
drawn through the middle of such waters, and not through the middle of
their main channels. Such a line, if extended according to the literal
terms of the treaty, would, it is obvious, occasionally intersect
islands. The manner in which the commissioners of the two Governments
dealt with this difficult subject may be seen in their reports. But
where the line thus following the middle of the river or water course
did not meet with islands, yet it was liable sometimes to leave the only
practicable navigable channel altogether on one side. The treaty made no
provision for the common use of the waters by the citizens and subjects
of both countries.

It has happened, therefore, in a few instances that the use of the river
in particular places would be greatly diminished to one party or the
other if in fact there was not a choice in the use of channels and
passages. Thus at the Long Sault, in the St. Lawrence--a dangerous
passage, practicable only for boats--the only safe run is between the
Long Sault Islands and Barnharts Island (all which belong to the United
States) on one side and the American shore on the other. On the other
hand, by far the best passage for vessels of any depth of water from
Lake Erie into the Detroit River is between Bois Blanc, a British
island, and the Canadian shore. So again, there are several channels or
passages, of different degrees of facility and usefulness, between the
several islands in the river St. Clair at or near its entry into the
lake of that name. In these three cases the treaty provides that all the
several passages and channels shall be free and open to the use of the
citizens and subjects of both parties.

The treaty obligations subsisting between the two countries for the
suppression of the African slave trade and the complaints made to this
Government within the last three or four years, many of them but too
well founded, of the visitation, seizure, and detention of American
vessels on that coast by British cruisers could not but form a delicate
and highly important part of the negotiations which have now been held.

The early and prominent part which the Government of the United States
has taken for the abolition of this unlawful and inhuman traffic is well
known. By the tenth article of the treaty of Ghent it is declared that
the traffic in slaves is irreconcilable with the principles of humanity
and justice, and that both His Majesty and the United States are
desirous of continuing their efforts to promote its entire abolition;
and it is thereby agreed that both the contracting parties shall use
their best endeavors to accomplish so desirable an object. The
Government of the United States has by law declared the African slave
trade piracy, and at its suggestion other nations have made similar
enactments. It has not been wanting in honest and zealous efforts, made
in conformity with the wishes of the whole country, to accomplish the
entire abolition of the traffic in slaves upon the African coast, but
these efforts and those of other countries directed to the same end have
proved to a considerable degree unsuccessful. Treaties are known to have
been entered into some years ago between England and France by which the
former power, which usually maintains a large naval force on the African
station, was authorized to seize and bring in for adjudication vessels
found engaged in the slave trade under the French flag.

It is known that in December last a treaty was signed in London by the
representatives of England, France, Russia, Prussia, and Austria having
for its professed object a strong and united effort of the five
powers to put an end to the traffic. This treaty was not officially
communicated to the Government of the United States, but its provisions
and stipulations are supposed to be accurately known to the public.
It is understood to be not yet ratified on the part of France.

No application or request has been made to this Government to become
party to this treaty, but the course it might take in regard to it has
excited no small degree of attention and discussion in Europe, as the
principle upon which it is founded and the stipulations which it
contains have caused warm animadversions and great political excitement.

In my message at the commencement of the present session of Congress
I endeavored to state the principles which this Government supports
respecting the right of search and the immunity of flags. Desirous of
maintaining those principles fully, at the same time that existing
obligations should be fulfilled, I have thought it most consistent with
the honor and dignity of the country that it should execute its own laws
and perform its own obligations by its own means and its own power.

The examination or visitation of the merchant vessels of one nation
by the cruisers of another for any purpose except those known and
acknowledged by the law of nations, under whatever restraints or
regulations it may take place, may lead to dangerous results. It is far
better by other means to supersede any supposed necessity or any motive
for such examination or visit. Interference with a merchant vessel by an
armed cruiser is always a delicate proceeding, apt to touch the point of
national honor as well as to affect the interests of individuals. It has
been thought, therefore, expedient, not only in accordance with the
stipulations of the treaty of Ghent, but at the same time as removing
all pretext on the part of others for violating the immunities of the
American flag upon the seas, as they exist and are defined by the law
of nations, to enter into the articles now submitted to the Senate.

The treaty which I now submit to you proposes no alteration, mitigation,
or modification of the rules of the law of nations. It provides simply
that each of the two Governments shall maintain on the coast of Africa
a sufficient squadron to enforce separately and respectively the laws,
rights, and obligations of the two countries for the suppression of the
slave trade.

Another consideration of great importance has recommended this mode of
fulfilling the duties and obligations of the country. Our commerce along
the western coast of Africa is extensive, and supposed to be increasing.
There is reason to think that in many cases those engaged in it have met
with interruptions and annoyances caused by the jealousy and instigation
of rivals engaged in the same trade. Many complaints on this subject
have reached the Government. A respectable naval force on the coast is
the natural resort and security against further occurrences of this
kind.

The surrender to justice of persons who, having committed high crimes,
seek an asylum in the territories of a neighboring nation would seem to
be an act due to the cause of general justice and properly belonging to
the present state of civilization and intercourse. The British Provinces
of North America are separated from the States of the Union by a line of
several thousand miles, and along portions of this line the amount of
population on either side is quite considerable, while the passage of
the boundary is always easy.

Offenders against the law on the one side transfer themselves to the
other. Sometimes, with great difficulty, they are brought to justice,
but very often they wholly escape. A consciousness of immunity from the
power of avoiding justice in this way instigates the unprincipled and
reckless to the commission of offenses, and the peace and good
neighborhood of the border are consequently often disturbed.

In the case of offenders fleeing from Canada into the United States,
the governors of States are often applied to for their surrender, and
questions of a very embarrassing nature arise from these applications.
It has been thought highly important, therefore, to provide for the
whole case by a proper treaty stipulation. The article on the subject
in the proposed treaty is carefully confined to such offenses as all
mankind agree to regard as heinous and destructive of the security of
life and property. In this careful and specific enumeration of crimes
the object has been to exclude all political offenses or criminal
charges arising from wars or intestine commotions. Treason, misprision
of treason, libels, desertion from military service, and other offenses
of similar character are excluded.

And lest some unforeseen inconvenience or unexpected abuse should arise
from the stipulation rendering its continuance in the opinion of one or
both of the parties not longer desirable, it is left in the power of
either to put an end to it at will.

The destruction of the steamboat _Caroline_ at Schlosser four or five
years ago occasioned no small degree of excitement at the time, and
became the subject of correspondence between the two Governments. That
correspondence, having been suspended for a considerable period, was
renewed in the spring of the last year, but no satisfactory result
having been arrived at, it was thought proper, though the occurrence
had ceased to be fresh and recent, not to omit attention to it
on the present occasion. It has only been so far discussed in the
correspondence now submitted as it was accomplished by a violation of
the territory of the United States. The letter of the British minister,
while he attempts to justify that violation upon the ground of a
pressing and overruling necessity, admitting, nevertheless, that
even if justifiable an apology was due for it, and accompanying this
acknowledgment with assurances of the sacred regard of his Government
for the inviolability of national territory, has seemed to me sufficient
to warrant forbearance from any further remonstrance against what took
place as an aggression on the soil and territory of the country. On the
subject of the interference of the British authorities in the West
Indies, a confident hope is entertained that the correspondence which
has taken place, showing the grounds taken by this Government and the
engagements entered into by the British minister, will be found such as
to satisfy the just expectation of the people of the United States.

The impressment of seamen from merchant vessels of this country by
British cruisers, although not practiced in time of peace, and therefore
not at present a productive cause of difference and irritation, has,
nevertheless, hitherto been so prominent a topic of controversy and is
so likely to bring on renewed contentions at the first breaking out of a
European war that it has been thought the part of wisdom now to take it
into serious and earnest consideration. The letter from the Secretary of
State to the British minister explains the ground which the Government
has assumed and the principles which it means to uphold. For the defense
of these grounds and the maintenance of these principles the most
perfect reliance is placed on the intelligence of the American people
and on their firmness and patriotism in whatever touches the honor of
the country or its great and essential interests.

JOHN TYLER.



[The following are inserted because they pertain to the treaty
transmitted with the message of President Tyler immediately preceding.]


DEPARTMENT OF STATE,

_Washington, August 3, 1848_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

The Secretary of State has the honor to transmit to the Senate, in
compliance with a resolution adopted by it on the 29th ultimo, a copy of
_joint report_ of the commissioners under the treaty of Washington of
August 9, 1842, together with a copy of the report of the American
commissioner transmitting the same to the State Department.

JAMES BUCHANAN.



_Mr. Smith to Mr. Buchanan_.

WASHINGTON, _April 20, 1848_.

SIR: In presenting to you the joint report of the commissioners
appointed under the treaty of Washington of August 9, 1842, to survey
and mark the line of boundary between the United States and the British
Provinces, which I have the honor herewith most respectfully to submit,
I have to perform the painful duty of informing you that the maps of
that line and of the adjacent country, which had been elaborately
constructed by the scientific corps on the part of the United States,
and contained upon 100 sheets of drawing paper of the largest size,
together with the tables of the survey, have been destroyed by the
conflagration of the building in which they were contained. This house
had been occupied by Major James D. Graham, the head of the scientific
corps and principal astronomer of the American commission, as his office
until his departure for Mexico. All the maps, drawings, and tables had
been completed and duly authenticated by the joint commissioners, and
were ready to be deposited with their joint report under their hands and
seals in the archives of this Government. Of this I had the honor to
inform you in my letter of the 24th ultimo.

I can hardly express the pain which this unfortunate event has
occasioned me. But I can not perceive that any imputation of blame can
properly be attached to any officer of the commission. The care and
custody of all the work of the United States scientific corps were
properly placed in charge of Major Graham, as the head of that corps,
who had had the immediate direction and superintendence of it from the
first organization of the commission. He required the maps and tables
at his office for reference and revision in the progress of the
astronomical work. Upon his departure for Mexico he placed Lieutenant
A.W. Whipple in his rooms with an injunction to guard with the utmost
care the valuable property of the commission. On the day after he left
the city, and when for the first time informed of the fact, I called
upon Lieutenant Whipple and requested him to have all the maps,
drawings, and tables ready to be turned over to the State Department on
the following day. On the 24th ultimo I acquainted you with that fact.

No censure can possibly be attributed to Lieutenant Whipple, whose great
care and attention to all his duties have been on all occasions highly
distinguished. He escaped from the fire with scarcely an article of his
dress, and his loss in money and clothing is at least $1,000. Major
Graham has lost his valuable library, together with personal effects
to a large amount. The fire was communicated from the basement of the
house, and by no effort could anything be saved.

There are tracings of the maps upon "tissue paper," without the
topography, in the State of Maine, but they are not signed by the
commissioners.

The field books of the engineers were, fortunately, not in Major
Graham's office, and are preserved.

Duplicates of the maps, duly authenticated, have been placed in the
British archives at London, which, although they have not the topography
of the country so fully laid down upon them as it was upon our own,
represent with equal exactness the survey of the boundary itself. Should
it be deemed expedient by this Government to procure copies of them,
access to those archives for that purpose would undoubtedly be
permitted, and the object accomplished at small expense, and when
completed these copies could be authenticated by the joint commissioners
in accordance with the provisions of the treaty.

I have the honor to be, with great respect, your obedient and humble
servant,

ALBERT SMITH.



_Report of the joint commission of boundary appointed under the treaty
of Washington of August 9, 1842_.

The undersigned, commissioners appointed under the treaty of Washington
to trace and mark the boundary, as directed by that treaty, between the
British possessions in North America and the United States--that is to
say, James Bucknall Bucknall Estcourt, lieutenant-colonel in the British
army, appointed commissioner by Her Britannic Majesty, and Albert Smith,
appointed commissioner by the President of the United States--having
accomplished the duty assigned to them, do now, in accordance with the
directions of the said treaty, submit the following report and the
accompanying maps, jointly signed, to their respective Governments.

In obedience to the terms of the treaty, the undersigned met at Bangor,
in the State of Maine, on the 1st day of May, 1843, where they produced
and verified the authority under which they each were respectively to
act. They then adjourned, because the weather was not sufficiently open
for taking the field, to the 1st of the following month (June), and
agreed to meet again at that time at Houlton.

Accordingly, they did meet at that place, and began their operations.

It may be desirable to state at the outset that for the sake of
convenience the whole line of boundary marked by the undersigned has
been divided in the mention made of the different portions into the
following grand divisions, viz:

"North line," from the source of the St. Croix to the intersection of
the St. John.

"River St. John," from the intersection of the north line to the mouth
of the St. Francis.

"River St. Francis," from its mouth to the outlet of Lake Pohenagamook.

"Southwest line," from the outlet of Lake Pohenagamook to the Northwest
Branch of the St. John.

"South line," from the Northwest Branch to the parallel of latitude 46 deg.
25' on the Southwest Branch.

"Southwest Branch," from the parallel 46 deg. 25' to its source.

"Highlands," from the source of the Southwest Branch of the St. John to
the source of Halls Stream.

"Halls Stream," from its source to the intersection of the line of
Valentine and Collins.

"West line," from Halls Stream to the St. Lawrence near St. Regis, along
the line of Valentine and Collins.

To return to the narration of operations:

The exploring line of Colonel Bouchette and Mr. Johnson, as directed by
the treaty, was traced from the monument at the source of the St. Croix
to the intersection of the St. John.

The monument found at the source of the St. Croix, as described in the
report of Colonel Bouchette and Mr. Johnson, and the course of their
exploring line, was traced by blazes or marks upon the trees.

An old line, cut out by the assistant surveyors of Colonel Bouchette and
Mr. Johnson, was also found, which terminated about half a mile north
of the South Branch of the Meduxnikeag, where, by records to which the
undersigned referred, they ascertained that it had been abandoned
because of its deviation from the exploring line of Colonel Bouchette
and Mr. Johnson.

After the exploration and re-marking of the north line it was cut out 30
feet wide. The same was afterwards done in all parts where the boundary
passed through woodland. After thus opening the north line it was
surveyed, and iron posts were erected at intervals to mark it.

The general bearing of the line was rather to the west of the meridian
of the monument at the source of the St. Croix. The precise line laid
down by the undersigned was determined by successive courses, of which
each was made to be as long as was convenient, provided it did not pass
out of the opening of 30 feet.

At each angle of deflection an iron monument was erected, and placed
anglewise with the line. Other monuments were erected at the crossing of
roads, rivers, and at every mile, commencing from the source of the St.
Croix. Those which were not intended to mark angles of deflection were
placed square with the line.

At the intersection of the St. John by the north line the river is deep
and broad. The boundary runs up the middle of the channel of the river,
as indicated by the maps, dividing the islands as follows:


  No. 1.  Ryan's Island................................ United States.
  No. 2.  King's Island................................ United States.
  No. 3.  Les Trois Isles.............................. United States.
  No. 4.  La Septieme Isle............................. United States.
  No. 5.  Quissibis.................................... Great Britain.
  No. 6.  La Grand Isle................................ United States.
  No. 7.  Thibideau's Islands.......................... United States.
  No. 8.  Madawaska Islands............................ Great Britain.
  No. 9.  Joseph Michaud's three islands............... United States.
  No. 10. Pine Island.................................. Great Britain.
  No. 11. Baker's }
          Turtle  }
          Dagle's } islands ........................... Great Britain.
          Fourth  }
          Fifth   }
  No. 12. Kennedy's Island............................. Great Britain.
  No. 13. Crock's    }
          Cranberry  } islands......................... Great Britain.
          Gooseberry }
  No. 14. Savage's Island.............................. United States.
  No. 15. Wheelock's Island............................ United States.
  No. 16. Caton's Island............................... United States.
  No. 17. Honeywell's Island........................... United States.
  No. 18. Savage and Johnson's Island.................. United States.
  No. 19. Grew's Island................................ United States.
  No. 20. Kendall's Island............................. Great Britain.


The islands were distributed to Great Britain or to the United States,
as they were found to be on the right or left of the deep channel. There
was but one doubtful case, La Septieme Isle, and that was apportioned to
the United States because the majority of the owners were ascertained to
reside on the United States side of the river.

Monuments were erected upon the islands, marking them for Great Britain
or the United States, as the case may have been.

After leaving the St. John the boundary enters the St. Francis, dividing
the islands at the mouth of that river in the manner shown in the maps.
It then runs up the St. Francis, through the middle of the lakes upon
it, to the outlet of Lake Pohenagamook, the third large lake from the
mouth of the river. At the outlet a large monument has been erected.

In order to determine the point on the Northwest Branch to which the
treaty directed that a straight line should be run from the outlet of
Lake Pohenagamook, a survey of that stream was made, and also of the
main St. John in the neighborhood of the mouth of the Northwest Branch,
and a line was cut between the St. John and the point on the Northwest
Branch ascertained by the survey to be 10 miles in the nearest direction
from it, and the distance was afterwards verified by chaining.

It was ascertained also, in accordance with the provisions of the
treaty, by a triangulation of the country toward the highlands dividing
the waters of the St. Lawrence and of the St. John, that more than 7
miles intervened between the point selected on the Northwest Branch and
the crest of the dividing ridge. A large iron monument was afterwards
erected on the point thus selected, and the space around was cleared and
sown with grass seed. It is a short distance below the outlet of Lake
Ishaganalshegeck.

The outlet of Lake Pohenagamook and the point on the Northwest Branch
designated by the treaty having been thus ascertained and marked, in the
spring of 1844 a straight line was run between them. Along that line,
which passes entirely through forest, monuments were erected at every
mile, at the crossings of the principal streams and rivers, and at the
tops of those hills where a transit instrument had been set up to test
the straightness of the line.

As soon as the parallel of latitude 46 deg. 25' had been determined on the
Southwest Branch, in the early part of the summer of 1844, a straight
line was drawn from the boundary point on the Northwest Branch to a
large monument erected on the left bank of the Southwest Branch where it
is intersected by the parallel of latitude 46 deg. 25'. The line so drawn
crosses the Southwest Branch once before it reaches the parallel of
latitude 46 deg. 25', and at about half a mile distance from that parallel.
There also a large monument has been set up on the left bank.

From the intersection of the parallel 46 deg. 25' the boundary ascends the
Southwest Branch, passes through a lake near its head, and so up a small
stream which falls into the lake from the west to the source of that
stream, which has been selected as the source of the Southwest Branch.

On the Southwest Branch there are two principal forks, at each of
which two monuments have been erected, one on each bank of the river
immediately above the forks and upon the branch established as the
boundary. The maps point out their positions. At the mouth of the small
stream selected as the source of the Southwest Branch a monument has
been erected upon a delta formed by two small outlets. Above those
outlets three other monuments have been placed at intervals upon the
same stream.

Upon the crest of the dividing ridge, very close to the source of the
Southwest Branch, a large monument has been erected. It is the first
point in the highlands, and from it the boundary runs along the crest
in a southerly direction, passing near to the southeastern shore of the
Portage Lake, and so on to a large monument erected on a small eminence
on the east side of the Kennebec road. Thence it passes through a
dwelling house called Tachereau's, which was standing there at the time
the line was run; so, by a tortuous course, it runs to the top of Sandy
Stream Mountain; thence, inclining to the southwest, it runs over Hog
Back the First, as shown in the maps; thence toward Hog Back the Second,
which it leaves on the north side. Further on, at the head of Leech
Lake, there is a stream which divides its waters and flows both into
Canada and into the United States. The boundary has been made to run up
that stream a short distance from the fork where the waters divide to a
second fork; thence between the streams which unite to form that fork,
and then to ascend again the dividing ridge. A monument has been erected
at the fork first mentioned, where the waters divide.

As the boundary approaches the valley of Spider River it bends to the
southeast, and, by a wide circuit over high and steep hills, it turns
the head of Spider River; thence it bends to the northwest until it
approaches within about 4 miles of Lake Megantic; thence it turns again
south, having the valley of Arnolds River on the right and of Dead River
on the left. It leaves Gasford Mountain in Canada, threads its way over
very high ground between the head of Arnolds River and the tributaries
of the Magalloway; inclines then to the north, so to the west, over very
rocky, mountainous, and difficult country, leaving Gipps Peak in the
United States, and turns by a sharp angle at Saddle Back to the south.
After that it again inclines to the west, and then to the south, and
again to the west, and passes the head of the Connecticut. About 3 miles
and a half east of the head of the Connecticut there is a division of
waters similar to that described near Leech Lake. The boundary runs down
a stream from near its source to the fork where it divides, and then
again follows the dividing ridge. The spot is noted on the map.

After the boundary has passed the head of the Connecticut it runs to the
northwest, descending into very low, swampy ground between the heads of
Indian Stream and the tributaries of the St. Francis. Thus it passes on,
bending again to the south of west, over a high hill, to the source of
Halls Stream.

Iron monuments have been erected at intervals along the highlands from
the source of the Southwest Branch of the St. John to the source of
Halls Stream, the position of each of which is shown upon the maps.

From the source of Halls Stream the boundary descends that river,
dividing the islands, which are, however, merely unimportant alluvial
deposits, in the manner indicated by the maps until it reaches the
intersection of that stream by the line formerly run by Valentine and
Collins as the forty-fifth degree of north latitude.

At that point a large monument has been erected on the right and a small
one on the left bank of the stream. Monuments have also been erected
along the bank of this stream, as indicated on the maps.

The line of Valentine and Collins was explored and found by the blazes
still remaining in the original forest.

Upon cutting into those blazes it was seen that deep seated in the tree
there was a scar, the surface of the original blaze, slightly decayed,
and upon counting the rings (which indicate each year's growth of the
tree) it was found that the blazes dated back to 1772, 1773, and 1774.
The line of Valentine and Collins was run in 1771, 1772, 1773, and 1774.
The coincidence of the dates of the blazes with those of the above line,
confirmed by the testimony of the people of the country, satisfied the
undersigned that the line they had found was that mentioned in the
treaty. Along this portion of the boundary, which is known as the
forty-fifth degree of Valentine and Collins, and which extends from
Halls Stream to St. Regis, there are several interruptions to the blazes
in those parts where clearings have been made, and there the authentic
marks of the precise situation of the old line have been lost. In those
cases the undersigned have drawn the boundary line straight from the
original blazes on the one side of a clearing to the original blazes on
the other side of the same clearing.

It can not be positively stated that the line as it has been traced
through those clearings precisely coincides with the old line, but the
undersigned believe that it does not differ materially from it; nor have
they had the means of determining a nearer or a surer approximation.

Along this line, at every point of deflection, an iron monument has been
erected; also at the crossing of rivers, lakes, and roads. Those which
mark deflections are placed, as on the "north line," anglewise with the
line; all the others are placed square with it. The maps show the
position of each.

On the eastern shore of Lake Memphremagog an astronomical station was
established, and on a large flat rock of granite, which happened to lie
between the astronomical station and the boundary, was cut the following
inscription:



                            Capt: Robinson.
                            Ast: Station
                            422 feet north.
                _Meridian_                      _Line._
     -----------------------------()--------------------------------

                            Boundary Line
                            595 feet south
                            August, 1845.

                    _British Boundary Commission_


A mark was cut upon the stone, as indicated by the dot upon the meridian
line above, from which these measurements were made.

At Rouses Point a monument of wrought stone was set up at the
intersection of the boundary by the meridian of the transit instrument
used there by Major Graham, and an inscription was cut upon it stating
the latitude and longitude, the names of the observer and his assistant,
the names of the commissioners, and the territories divided.

To mark the position of the instruments used at the following
astronomical stations along the west line, two monuments within a few
feet of each other have been erected at each station, and they have been
placed on the boundary line due north or south of the instrument, as the
case may have been.

The stations are: Lake Memphremagog, Richford, John McCoy's, Trout River.

The boundary along the west line, though very far from being a straight
line, is generally about half a mile north of the true parallel of
latitude 45 deg. from Halls Stream to Rouses Point. At about 28 miles west
of Rouses Point it, however, crosses that parallel to the south until it
reaches Chateaugay River, where it bends northward, and, crossing the
parallel again about 4 miles east of St. Regis, it strikes the St.
Lawrence 151 feet north of 45 deg.. At that point a large monument has been
erected on the bank of the St. Lawrence. Two large monuments have also
been erected, one on either side of the river Richelieu near Rouses
Point.

No marks of the old line were to be found about St. Regis. It was
therefore agreed to run a line due west from the last blaze which should
be found in the woods on the east side of St. Regis. That blaze occurred
about 1 mile east of the St. Regis River.

The maps, which exhibit the boundary on a scale of 4 inches to 1 statute
mile, consist of 62 consecutive sheets of antiquarian paper as
constructed by the British and of 61 as constructed by the American
commission. A general map has also been constructed on a scale of 8
miles to 1 inch by the British and of 10 miles to 1 inch by the American
commission, upon which the before-mentioned sheets are represented.

The following portions of the boundary have been laid down by the
British commission, on detached maps, on a scale of 12 inches to 1 mile,
which have been signed by both commissioners:

Grand Falls of the St. John, including the intersection of that
river by the north line; islands of the St. John; the outlet of Lake
Pohenagamook; the turning point of the boundary on the Northwest Branch
of the St. John; the intersection of the Southwest Branch by the
parallel of latitude 46 deg. 25'; the source of the Southwest Branch; the
source of Halls Stream; the intersection of Halls Stream by the west
line; Rouses Point; St. Regis; Derby.

But similar maps have not been prepared by the American commission,
because during the interval between the finishing of the maps of the
British commission and those of the American it was thought that the
maps already constructed upon a scale of 4 inches to 1 mile represented
the boundary with sufficient clearness and accuracy.

The astronomical observations were begun at the Grand Falls early in
June, 1843, and were carried up the St. John River to the Northwest
Branch by a chain of stations, which, together with the results
obtained, are tabulated in the appendix accompanying this report.

From the valley of the St. John an astronomical connection was made with
Quebec, and thence to Montreal, and so to Rouses Point. From Rouses
Point a connection was obtained with Cambridge University, near Boston.

The astronomical stations on the west line were: Intersection of Halls
Stream by the west line, Lake Memphremagog, Richford, Rouses Point, John
McCoy's, Trout River, St. Regis.

Latitude was also obtained at an astronomical station established for
the purpose at the head of the Connecticut.

Volumes containing the astronomical observations of both commissions are
herewith submitted. From them it will be observed that the results for
absolute longitude obtained by the British and American astronomers do
not agree. It being a difference in no way affecting the survey of the
boundary line, the undersigned do not feel called upon to attempt to
reconcile it. The data upon which those results are based may be seen
in the volumes of observations accompanying this report.

In the appendix will be found, in a tabular form, the following:

An abstract of the survey of the boundary along the north line; an
abstract of the survey of the boundary along the southwest line; an
abstract of the survey of the boundary along the south line; an abstract
of the survey of the boundary along the highlands; an abstract of
the survey of the boundary along the west line; the position of the
monuments erected on the Southwest Branch of the St. John and on Halls
Stream; the distribution of the islands of the St. John and the
monuments on them; the guide lines and offsets run by each commission
for the survey of the highlands; the azimuths of verification for the
survey of the highlands; the latitudes and longitudes obtained from the
astronomical observations; the comparative longitudes obtained, and the
methods used for the purpose.

Upon comparing the maps of the two commissions it will be seen that the
American commission numbers two monuments more than the British. Those
are to be found, one on the "Fourth Island," in the river St. John, and
the other on the highlands between the source of the Southwest Branch of
the river St. John and the Kennebec road.

On the maps of the British commission representing the "west line" the
name of the town of "_Derby_" has been improperly placed north of the
line instead of south of it. Also, on the same maps the direction of
Salmon River, near the western extremity of the "west line," has been
incorrectly laid down from the boundary line northward. A direction has
been given to it northeasterly instead of northwesterly.

The above two corrections the British commissioner is authorized to make
on his maps after his return to England.

To avoid unnecessary delay in making their joint report, the undersigned
have attached their signatures to the maps, although the lettering
of some of the astronomical stations upon the maps of the American
commission, as well as the alterations before mentioned in the maps of
the British commission, are yet to be made; but in the maps of both the
boundary has been laid down accurately and definitively, and the
undersigned engage that it shall not be altered in any respect.

In conclusion the undersigned have the honor to report that the line of
boundary described in the foregoing statement has been run, marked, and
surveyed, and the accompanying maps faithfully constructed from that
survey.

The undersigned take leave to add that the most perfect harmony has
subsisted between the two commissions from first to last, and that no
differences have arisen between the undersigned in the execution of the
duties intrusted to them.

Signed and sealed in duplicate, at the city of Washington, this 28th day
of June, A.D. 1847.

J.B. BUCKNALL ESTCOURT, [SEAL.]
  _Lieutenant-Colonel, Her Britannic Majesty's Commissioner_.

ALBERT SMITH, [SEAL.]
  _United States Commissioner_.

NOTE.--The astronomical computations of the American commission not
being completed, and it being unnecessary to defer the signing of the
report on that account, the American commissioner engages to transmit
them, with any other papers or tables not yet finished, as soon as they
shall be so, to the British commissioner, through the American minister
resident in London, to whom, upon delivery of the documents, the British
commissioner will give a receipt, to be transmitted to the American
commissioner.

J. B. BUCKNALL ESTCOURT,
  _Lieutenant-Colonel, H.B.M. Commissioner of Boundary_.

ALBERT SMITH,
  _United States Commissioner_.



WASHINGTON, _August 18, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

I transmit to the Senate, for its consideration with a view to its
ratification, a treaty of amity, commerce, and navigation with the
Republic of Texas, negotiated at the seat of Government of the United
States between the Secretary of State, duly empowered for that purpose,
and the charge d'affaires of that Republic.

In forming the first commercial treaty between the two Governments an
anxious desire has been felt to introduce such provisions as should
promote the interests of both countries. The immediate proximity of
Texas to the United States and the consequent facility of intercourse,
the nature of its principal agricultural production, and the relations
which both countries bear to several large rivers which are boundaries
between them, and which in some part of their course run within the
territories of both, have caused peculiarities of condition and
interests which it has been necessary to guard.

The treaty provides that Texas shall enjoy a right of deposit for such
of her productions as may be introduced into the United States for
exportation, but upon the condition that the Executive of the United
States may prescribe such regulations as may be necessary for the proper
enjoyment of the privilege within our territory. It was thought no more
than reasonable to grant this facility to the trade of Texas, under such
conditions as seem best calculated to guard against abuse or
inconvenience.

The treaty further provides that raw cotton may be imported from either
country into the other free of duties. In general it is not wise to
enter into treaty stipulations respecting duties of import; they are
usually much better left to the operation of general laws. But there are
circumstances existing in this case which have been thought to justify a
departure from the general rule, and the addition of it to the number of
instances, not large, in which regulations of duties of imports have
been made the subject of national compact.

The United States consume large quantities of raw cotton, but they are
exporters of the article to a still greater extent. Texas, for the
present at least, exports her whole crop. These exportations are, in
general, to the same foreign markets, and it is supposed to be of no
considerable importance to the American producer whether he meets the
Texan product at home or abroad.

On the other hand, it is thought that a useful commercial intercourse
would be promoted in several ways by receiving the raw cotton of Texas
at once into the United States free of duty. The tendency of such a
measure is to bring to the United States, in the first instance, Texan
cotton ultimately destined to European markets. The natural effect of
this, it is supposed, will be to increase the business of the cities of
the United States to the extent of this importation and exportation,
and to secure a further degree of employment to the navigation of the
country. But these are by no means all the benefits which may be
reasonably expected from the arrangement. Texas, at least for a
considerable time to come, must import all the manufactured articles
and much of the supplies and provisions necessary for her use and
consumption. These commodities she will be likely to obtain, if to be
had, in the markets of the country in which she disposes of her main
annual product. The manufactures of the North and East, therefore, and
the grain and provisions of the Western States are likely to find in
Texas a demand, increased by whatever augments intercourse between the
two countries, and especially by whatever tends to give attraction to
the cities of the United States as marts for the sale of her great and
principal article of export.

As a security, however, against unforeseen results or occurrences,
it has been thought advisable to give this article of the treaty a
limitation of five years.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _August 23, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

A resolution of the Senate of the 21st of June last requested the
President to communicate to the Senate, so far as he might deem it
compatible with the public interests, what measures, if any, had been
taken to obtain the recognition by the Mexican Government of such claims
of American citizens as were laid before the late joint commission, but
were not finally acted on by it, and the satisfaction of such claims as
were admitted by said commission; also whether any facts had come to his
knowledge calculated to induce a belief that any such claims had been
rejected in consequence of the evidence thereof having been withheld
by the Mexican Government, its officers or agents, and any other
information which he might deem it expedient to communicate relative
to said claims; and another resolution of the 6th instant requested
the President, so far as he might deem it compatible with the public
service, to communicate to the Senate the measures taken to obtain the
performance of the stipulations contained in the convention with Mexico
in relation to the awards made by the commissioners and umpire under
said convention.

In the present state of the correspondence and of the relations between
the two Governments on these important subjects it is not deemed
consistent with the public interest to communicate the information
requested. The business engages earnest attention, and will be made the
subject of a full communication to Congress at the earliest practicable
period.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _August 24, 1842_.

_To the Senate of the United States_:

On the 15th day of April, 1842, in virtue of the sentence of a
court-martial regularly convened under orders from the Secretary of the
Navy, which received my approval, John H. Clack, who was a captain in
the Navy, was dismissed the service. Since the confirmation of that
sentence a letter has been addressed by Mr. Paulding, late Secretary
of the Navy, to Captain Clack, which leads to the belief that he had
analyzed the charges made against Captain Clack, and for reasons which
appeared to him satisfactory and which, according to his letter, he
indorsed on the charges, disposed of the case by refusing to submit it
to a court-martial.

Notwithstanding a diligent search has been made for this document, none
such can be found; but the only paper in the office having reference
to this subject is a letter addressed by Mr. Paulding to Lieutenant
Buchanan, a copy of which, together with the original of that of Mr. P.
to Captain C., is herewith communicated. I felt it, however, every way
due to the high character of Mr. Paulding to consider the fact stated by
him to be as well sustained by his declaration to that effect as if the
record was found, and as the court-martial would not have been ordered
by the present Secretary with the knowledge of the fact stated by Mr.
Paulding, since it would have been improper to have reopened a case once
finally disposed of, I have felt that it was alike due to the general
service of the Navy as to Mr. Clack to nominate him for reappointment
to the service.

I therefore nominate John H. Clack to be a captain in the Navy of the
United States.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _August 25, 1842_.

_To the House of Representatives of the United States_:

In answer to the resolution of the House of Representatives of the
11th of June last, upon the subject of claims of citizens of the United
States against the Government of the Mexican Republic, I transmit a
report from the Secretary of State and a copy of the report of the
commissioners on the part of the United States under the late convention
between the United States and that Republic.

JOHN TYLER.




VETO MESSAGES.


WASHINGTON, _June 29, 1842_.

_To the House of Representatives of the United States_:

I return the bill, which originated in the House of Representatives,
entitled "An act to extend for a limited period the present laws for
laying and collecting duties on imports," with the following objections:

It suspends--in other words, abrogates for the time--the provision of
the act of 1833, commonly called the "compromise act." The only ground
on which this departure from the solemn adjustment of a great and
agitating question seems to have been regarded as expedient is the
alleged necessity of establishing by legislative enactments rules and
regulations for assessing the duties to be levied on imports after the
30th June according to the home valuation, and yet the bill expressly
provides that "if before the 1st of August there be no further
legislation upon the subject, the laws for laying and collecting duties
shall be the same as though this act had not been passed." In other
words, that the act of 1833, imperfect as it is considered, shall in
that case continue to be and to be executed under such rules and
regulations as previous statutes had prescribed or had enabled the
executive department to prescribe for that purpose, leaving the supposed
chasm in the revenue laws just as it was before.

I am certainly far from being disposed to deny that additional
legislation upon the subject is very desirable; on the contrary, the
necessity, as well as difficulty, of establishing uniformity in the
appraisements to be made in conformity with the true intention of that
act was brought to the notice of Congress in my message to Congress at
the opening of its present session. But however sensible I may be of
the embarrassments to which the Executive, in the absence of all aid
from the superior wisdom of the Legislature, will be liable in the
enforcement of the existing laws, I have not, with the sincerest wish to
acquiesce in its expressed will, been able to persuade myself that the
exigency of the occasion is so great as to justify me in signing the
bill in question with my present views of its character and effects. The
existing laws, as I am advised, are sufficient to authorize and enable
the collecting officers, under the directions of the Secretary of the
Treasury, to levy the duties imposed by the act of 1833.

That act was passed under peculiar circumstances, to which it is not
necessary that I should do more than barely allude. Whatever maybe,
in theory, its character, I have always regarded it as importing the
highest moral obligation. It has now existed for nine years unchanged in
any essential particular, with as general acquiescence, it is believed,
of the whole country as that country has ever manifested for any of her
wisely established institutions. It has insured to it the repose which
always flows from truly wise and moderate counsels--a repose the more
striking because of the long and angry agitations which preceded it.
This salutary law proclaims in express terms the principle which, while
it led to the abandonment of a scheme of indirect taxation founded on a
false basis and pushed to dangerous excess, justifies any enlargement
of duties that may be called for by the real exigencies of the public
service. It provides "that duties shall be laid for the purpose of
raising such revenue as may be necessary to an economical administration
of the Government." It is therefore in the power of Congress to lay
duties as high as its discretion may dictate for the necessary uses of
the Government without infringing upon the objects of the act of 1833.
I do not doubt that the exigencies of the Government do require an
increase of the tariff of duties above 20 per cent, and I as little
doubt that Congress may, above as well as below that rate, so
discriminate as to give incidental protection to manufacturing industry,
thus to make the burdens which it is compelled to impose upon the people
for the purposes of Government productive of a double benefit. This
most of the reasonable opponents of protective duties seem willing to
concede, and, if we may judge from the manifestations of public opinion
in all quarters, this is all that the manufacturing interests really
require. I am happy in the persuasion that this double object can be
most easily and effectually accomplished at the present juncture without
any departure from the spirit and principle of the statute in question.
The manufacturing classes have now an opportunity which may never occur
again of permanently identifying their interests with those of the whole
country, and making them, in the highest sense of the term, a national
concern. The moment is propitious to the interests of the whole country
in the introduction of harmony among all its parts and all its several
interests. The same rate of imposts, and no more, as will most surely
reestablish the public credit will secure to the manufacturer all the
protection he ought to desire, with every prospect of permanence and
stability which the hearty acquiescence of the whole country on a
reasonable system can hold out to him.

But of this universal acquiescence, and the harmony and confidence and
the many other benefits that will certainly result from it, I regard
the suspension of the law for distributing the proceeds of the sales
of the public lands as an indispensable condition. This measure is, in
my judgment, called for by a large number, if not a great majority, of
the people of the United States; by the state of the public credit and
finances; by the critical posture of our various foreign relations;
and, above all, by that most sacred of all duties--public faith. The
act of September last, which provides for the distribution, couples it
inseparably with the condition that it shall cease--first, in case of
war; second, as soon and so long as the rate of duties shall for any
reason whatever be raised above 20 per cent. Nothing can be more clear,
express, or imperative than this language. It is in vain to allege that
a deficit in the Treasury was known to exist and that means were taken
to supply this deficit by loan when the act was passed. It is true that
a loan was authorized at the same session during which the distribution
law was passed, but the most sanguine of the friends of the two measures
entertained no doubt but that the loan would be eagerly sought after and
taken up by capitalists and speedily reimbursed by a country destined,
as they hoped, soon to enjoy an overflowing prosperity. The very terms
of the loan, making it redeemable _in three years_, demonstrate this
beyond all cavil. Who at the time foresaw or imagined the possibility of
the present real state of things, when a nation that has paid off her
whole debt since the last peace, while all the other great powers have
been increasing theirs, and whose resources, already so great, are yet
but in the infancy of their development, should be compelled to haggle
in the money market for a paltry sum not equal to one year's revenue
upon her economical system? If the distribution law is to be
indefinitely suspended, according not only to its own terms, but by
universal consent, in the case of war, wherein are the actual exigencies
of the country or the moral obligation to provide for them less under
present circumstances than they could be were we actually involved in
war? It appears to me to be the indispensable duty of all concerned in
the administration of public affairs to see that a state of things so
humiliating and so perilous should not last a moment longer than is
absolutely unavoidable. Much less excusable should we be in parting
with any portion of our available means, at least until the demands
of the Treasury are fully supplied. But besides the urgency of such
considerations, the fact is undeniable that the distribution act could
not have become a law without the guaranty in the proviso of the act
itself.

This connection, thus meant to be inseparable, is severed by the bill
presented to me. The bill violates the principle of the acts of 1833 and
September, 1841, by suspending the first and rendering for a time the
last inoperative. Duties above 20 per cent are proposed to be levied,
and yet the _proviso_ in the distribution act is disregarded. The
proceeds of the sales are to be distributed on the 1st of August, so
that, while the duties proposed to be enacted exceed 20 per cent, no
suspension of the distribution to the States is permitted to take place.
To abandon the principle for a month is to open the way for its total
abandonment. If such is not meant, why postpone at all? Why not let the
distribution take place on the 1st of July if the law so directs (which,
however, is regarded as questionable)? But why not have limited the
provision to that effect? Is it for the accommodation of the Treasury?
I see no reason to believe that the Treasury will be in better condition
to meet the payment on the 1st of August than on the 1st of July.

The bill assumes that a distribution of the proceeds of the public
lands is, by existing laws, to be made on the 1st day of July, 1842,
notwithstanding there has been an imposition of duties on imports
exceeding 20 per cent up to that day, and directs it to be made on the
1st of August next. It seems to me very clear that this conclusion is
equally erroneous and dangerous, as it would divert from the Treasury a
fund sacredly pledged for the general purposes of the Government in the
event of a rate of duty above 20 per cent being found necessary for an
economical administration of the Government.

The bill under consideration is designed only as a temporary measure;
and thus a temporary measure, passed merely for the convenience of
Congress, is made to affect the vital principle of an important act.
If the proviso of the act of September, 1841, can be suspended for the
whole period of a temporary law, why not for the whole period of a
permanent law? In fact, a doubt may be well entertained, according to
strict legal rules, whether the condition, having been thus expressly
suspended by this bill and rendered inapplicable to a case where it
would otherwise have clearly applied, will not be considered as ever
after satisfied and gone. Without expressing any decided opinion on this
point, I see enough in it to justify me in adhering to the law as it
stands in preference to subjecting a condition so vitally affecting the
peace of the country, and so solemnly enacted at a momentous crisis, and
so steadfastly adhered to ever since, and so replete, if adhered to,
with good to every interest of the country, to doubtful or captious
interpretation.

In discharging the high duties thus imposed on me by the Constitution I
repeat to the House my entire willingness to cooperate in all financial
measures, constitutional and proper, which in its wisdom it may judge
necessary and proper to reestablish the credit of the Government.
I believe that the proceeds of the sales of the public lands being
restored to the Treasury--or, more properly speaking, the proviso of
the act of September, 1841, being permitted to remain in full force--a
tariff of duties may easily be adjusted, which, while it will yield a
revenue sufficient to maintain the Government in vigor by restoring its
credit, will afford ample protection and infuse a new life into all our
manufacturing establishments. The condition of the country calls for
such legislation, and it will afford me the most sincere pleasure to
cooperate in it.

JOHN TYLER.



WASHINGTON, _August 9, 1842_.

_To the House of Representatives of the United States_:

It is with unfeigned regret that I find myself under the necessity of
returning to the House of Representatives with my objections a bill
entitled "An act to provide revenue from imports, and to change and
modify existing laws imposing duties on imports, and for other
purposes." Nothing can be more painful to any individual called upon to
perform the Chief Executive duties under our limited Constitution than
to be constrained to withhold his assent from an important measure
adopted by the Legislature. Yet he would neither fulfill the high
purposes of his station nor consult the true interests or the solemn
will of the people--the common constituents of both branches of the
Government--by yielding his well-considered, most deeply fixed, and
repeatedly declared opinions on matters of great public concernment to
those of a coordinate department without requesting that department
seriously to reexamine the subject of their difference. The exercise of
some independence of judgment in regard to all acts of legislation is
plainly implied in the responsibility of approving them. At all times
a duty, it becomes a peculiarly solemn and imperative one when the
subjects passed upon by Congress happen to involve, as in the present
instance, the most momentous issues, to affect variously the various
parts of a great country, and to have given rise in all quarters to such
a conflict of opinion as to render it impossible to conjecture with any
certainty on which side the majority really is. Surely if the pause for
reflection intended by the wise authors of the Constitution by referring
the subject back to Congress for reconsideration be ever expedient and
necessary it is precisely such a case as the present.

On the subject of distributing the proceeds of the sales of the public
lands in the existing state of the finances it has been my duty to make
known my settled convictions on various occasions during the present
session of Congress. At the opening of the extra session, upward of
twelve months ago, sharing fully in the general hope of returning
prosperity and credit, I recommended such a distribution, but that
recommendation was even then expressly coupled with the condition that
the duties on imports should not exceed the rate of 20 per cent provided
by the compromise act of 1833. These hopes were not a little encouraged
and these views strengthened by the report of Mr. Ewing, then Secretary
of the Treasury, which was shortly thereafter laid before Congress, in
which he recommended the imposition of duties at the rate of 20 per cent
_ad valorem_ on all free articles, with specified exceptions, and stated
"if this measure be adopted there will be received in the Treasury from
customs in the last quarter of the present year (1841) $5,300,000; in
all of the year 1842, about $22,500,000; and in the year 1843, after the
final reduction under the act of March 2, 1833, about $20,800,000;" and
adds:


  It is believed that after the heavy expenditures required by the public
  service in the present year shall have been provided for, the revenues
  which will accrue from that or a nearly approximate rate of duty will
  be sufficient to defray the expenses of the Government and leave a
  surplus to be annually applied to the gradual payment of the national
  debt, leaving the proceeds of _the public lands_ to be disposed of as
  Congress shall see fit.


I was most happy that Congress at the time seemed entirely to concur in
the recommendations of the Executive, and, anticipating the correctness
of the Secretary's conclusions, and in view of an actual surplus, passed
the distribution act of the 4th September last, wisely limiting its
operation by two conditions having reference, both of them, to a
possible state of the Treasury different from that which had been
anticipated by the Secretary of the Treasury and to the paramount
necessities of the public service. It ordained that "if at any time
during the existence of that act there should be an imposition of duties
on imports inconsistent with the provision of the act of the 2d March,
1833, and beyond the rate of duties fixed by that act, to wit, 20 per
cent on the value of such imports or any of them, then the distribution
should be suspended, and should continue so suspended until that cause
should be removed," By a previous clause it had, in a like spirit of
wise and cautious patriotism, provided for another case, in which all
are even now agreed, that the proceeds of the sales of the public lands
should be used for the defense of the country. It was enacted that the
act should continue and be in force until otherwise provided by law,
unless the United States should become involved in war with any foreign
power, in which event, from the commencement of hostilities, the act
should be suspended until the cessation of hostilities.

Not long after the opening of the present session of Congress the
unprecedented and extraordinary difficulties that have recently
embarrassed the finances of the country began to assume a serious
aspect. It soon became quite evident that the hopes under which the act
of 4th September was passed, and which alone justified it in the eyes
either of Congress who imposed or of the Executive who approved, the
first of the two conditions just recited were not destined to be
fulfilled. Under the pressure, therefore, of the embarrassments which
had thus unexpectedly arisen it appeared to me that the course to be
pursued had been clearly marked out for the Government by that act
itself. The condition contemplated in it as requiring a suspension of
its operation had occurred. It became necessary in the opinions of all
to raise the rate of duties upon imports above 20 per cent; and with a
view both to provide available means to meet present exigencies and to
lay the foundation for a successful negotiation of a loan, I felt it
incumbent on me to urge upon Congress to raise the duties accordingly,
imposing them in a spirit of a wise discrimination for the twofold
object of affording ample revenue for the Government and incidental
protection to the various branches of domestic industry. I also pressed,
in the most emphatic but respectful language I could employ, the
necessity of making the land sales available to the Treasury, as the
basis of public credit. I did not think that I could stand excused, much
less justified, before the people of the United States, nor could I
reconcile it to myself to recommend the imposition of additional taxes
upon them without at the same time urging the employment of all the
legitimate means of the Government toward satisfying its wants. These
opinions were communicated in advance of any definitive action of
Congress on the subject either of the tariff or land sales, under a high
sense of public duty and in compliance with an express injunction of the
Constitution, so that if a collision, extremely to be deprecated, as
such collisions always are, has seemingly arisen between the executive
and legislative branches of the Government, it has assuredly not been
owing to any caprici