simultaneously with the settlement and colonization of the American
continent. Most of the colonies planted here became independent nations
in the close of the last and the beginning of the present century. Our
own country embraces communities which at one period were colonies of
Great Britain, France, Spain, Holland, Sweden, and Russia. The people
in the West Indies, with the exception of those of the island of Hayti,
have neither attained nor aspired to independence, nor have they become
prepared for self-defense. Although possessing considerable commercial
value, they have been held by the several European States which
colonized or at some time conquered them, chiefly for purposes of
military and naval strategy in carrying out European policy and designs
in regard to this continent. In our Revolutionary War ports and harbors
in the West India islands were used by our enemy, to the great injury
and embarrassment of the United States. We had the same experience in
our second war with Great Britain. The same European policy for a long
time excluded us even from trade with the West Indies, while we were at
peace with all nations. In our recent civil war the rebels and their
piratical and blockade-breaking allies found facilities in the same
ports for the work, which they too successfully accomplished, of
injuring and devastating the commerce which we are now engaged in
rebuilding. We labored especially under this disadvantage, that
European steam vessels employed by our enemies found friendly shelter,
protection, and supplies in West Indian ports, while our naval
operations were necessarily carried on from our own distant shores.
There was then a universal feeling of the want of an advanced naval
outpost between the Atlantic coast and Europe. The duty of obtaining
such an outpost peacefully and lawfully, while neither doing nor
menacing injury to other states, earnestly engaged the attention of the
executive department before the close of the war, and it has not been
lost sight of since that time. A not entirely dissimilar naval want
revealed itself during the same period on the Pacific coast. The
required foothold there was fortunately secured by our late treaty with
the Emperor of Russia, and it now seems imperative that the more
obvious necessities of the Atlantic coast should not be less carefully
provided for. A good and convenient port and harbor, capable of easy
defense, will supply that want. With the possession of such a station
by the United States, neither we nor any other American nation need
longer apprehend injury or offense from any transatlantic enemy. I
agree with our early statesmen that the West Indies naturally gravitate
to, and may be expected ultimately to be absorbed by, the continental
States, including our own. I agree with them also that it is wise to
leave the question of such absorption to this process of natural
political gravitation. The islands of St. Thomas and St. John, which
constitute a part of the group called the Virgin Islands, seemed to
offer us advantages immediately desirable, while their acquisition
could be secured in harmony with the principles to which I have
alluded. A treaty has therefore been concluded with the King of Denmark
for the cession of those islands, and will be submitted to the Senate
for consideration.
It will hardly be necessary to call the attention of Congress to the
subject of providing for the payment to Russia of the sum stipulated in
the treaty for the cession of Alaska. Possession having been formally
delivered to our commissioner, the territory remains for the present in
care of a military force, awaiting such civil organization as shall be
directed by Congress.
The annexation of many small German States to Prussia and the
reorganization of that country under a new and liberal constitution
have induced me to renew the effort to obtain a just and prompt
settlement of the long-vexed question concerning the claims of foreign
states for military service from their subjects naturalized in the
United States.
In connection with this subject the attention of Congress is
respectfully called to a singular and embarrassing conflict of laws.
The executive department of this Government has hitherto uniformly
held, as it now holds, that naturalization in conformity with the
Constitution and laws of the United States absolves the recipient from
his native allegiance. The courts of Great Britain hold that allegiance
to the British Crown is indefensible, and is not absolved by our laws
of naturalization. British judges cite courts and law authorities of
the United States in support of that theory against the position held
by the executive authority of the United States. This conflict
perplexes the public mind concerning the rights of naturalized citizens
and impairs the national authority abroad. I called attention to this
subject in my last annual message, and now again respectfully appeal to
Congress to declare the national will unmistakably upon this important
question.
The abuse of our laws by the clandestine prosecution of the African
slave trade from American ports or by American citizens has altogether
ceased, and under existing circumstances no apprehensions of its
renewal in this part of the world are entertained. Under these
circumstances it becomes a question whether we shall not propose to Her
Majesty's Government a suspension or discontinuance of the stipulations
for maintaining a naval force for the suppression of that trade.
***
State of the Union Address
Andrew Johnson
December 9, 1868
Fellow-Citizens of the Senate and House of Representatives:
Upon the reassembling of Congress it again becomes my duty to call your
attention to the state of the Union and to its continued disorganized
condition under the various laws which have been passed upon the
subject of reconstruction.
It may be safely assumed as an axiom in the government of states that
the greatest wrongs inflicted upon a people are caused by unjust and
arbitrary legislation, or by the unrelenting decrees of despotic
rulers, and that the timely revocation of injurious and oppressive
measures is the greatest good that can be conferred upon a nation. The
legislator or ruler who has the wisdom and magnanimity to retrace his
steps when convinced of error will sooner or later be rewarded with the
respect and gratitude of an intelligent and patriotic people.
Our own history, although embracing a period less than a century,
affords abundant proof that most, if not all, of our domestic troubles
are directly traceable to violations of the organic law and excessive
legislation. The most striking illustrations of this fact are furnished
by the enactments of the past three years upon the question of
reconstruction. After a fair trial they have substantially failed and
proved pernicious in their results, and there seems to be no good
reason why they should longer remain upon the statute book. States to
which the Constitution guarantees a republican form of government have
been reduced to military dependencies in each of which the people have
been made subject to the arbitrary will of the commanding general.
Although the Constitution requires that each State shall be represented
in Congress, Virginia, Mississippi, and Texas are yet excluded from the
two Houses, and, contrary to the express provisions of that instrument
were denied participation in the recent election for a President and
Vice-President of the United States. The attempt to place the white
population under the domination of persons of color in the South has
impaired, if not destroyed, the kindly relations that had previously
existed between them: and mutual distrust has engendered a feeling of
animosity which leading in some instances to collision and bloodshed,
has prevented that cooperation between the two races so essential to
the success of industrial enterprise in the Southern States. Nor have
the inhabitants of those States alone suffered from the disturbed
condition of affairs growing out of these Congressional enactments. The
entire Union has been agitated by grave apprehensions of troubles which
might again involve the peace of the nation; its interests have been
injuriously affected by the derangement of business and labor, and the
consequent want of prosperity throughout that portion of the country.
The Federal Constitution--the magna charta of American rights, under
whose wise and salutary provisions we have successfully conducted all
our domestic and foreign affairs, sustained ourselves in peace and in
war, and become a great nation among the powers of the earth--must
assuredly be now adequate to the settlement of questions growing out of
the civil war, waged alone for its vindication. This great fact is made
most manifest by the condition of the country when Congress assembled
in the month of December, 1865. Civil strife had ceased, the spirit of
rebellion had spent its entire force, in the Southern States the people
had warmed into national life, and throughout the whole country a
healthy reaction in public sentiment had taken place. By the
application of the simple yet effective provisions of the Constitution
the executive department, with the voluntary aid of the States, had
brought the work of restoration as near completion as was within the
scope of its authority, and the nation was encouraged by the prospect
of an early and satisfactory adjustment of all its difficulties.
Congress, however, intervened, and, refusing to perfect the work so
nearly consummated, declined to admit members from the unrepresented
States, adopted a series of measures which arrested the progress of
restoration, frustrated all that had been so successfully accomplished,
and, after three years of agitation and strife, has left the country
further from the attainment of union and fraternal feeling than at the
inception of the Congressional plan of reconstruction. It needs no
argument to show that legislation which has produced such baneful
consequences should be abrogated, or else made to conform to the
genuine principles of republican government.
Under the influence of party passion and sectional prejudice, other
acts have been passed not warranted by the Constitution. Congress has
already been made familiar with my views respecting the
"tenure-of-office bill." Experience has proved that its repeal is
demanded by the best interests of the country, and that while it
remains in force the President can not enjoin that rigid accountability
of public officers so essential to an honest and efficient execution of
the laws. Its revocation would enable the executive department to
exercise the power of appointment and removal in accordance with the
original design of the Federal Constitution.
The act of March 2, 1867, making appropriations for the support of the
Army for the year ending June 30, 1868, and for other purposes,
contains provisions which interfere with the President's constitutional
functions as Commander in Chief of the Army and deny to States of the
Union the right to protect themselves by means of their own militia.
These provisions should be at once annulled; for while the first might,
in times of great emergency, seriously embarrass the Executive in
efforts to employ and direct the common strength of the nation for its
protection and preservation, the other is contrary to the express
declaration of the Constitution that "a well-regulated militia being
necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to
keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
It is believed that the repeal of all such laws would be accepted by
the American people as at least a partial return to the fundamental
principles of the Government, and an indication that hereafter the
Constitution is to be made the nation's safe and unerring guide. They
can be productive of no permanent benefit to the country, and should
not be permitted to stand as so many monuments of the deficient wisdom
which has characterized our recent legislation.
The condition of our finances demands the early and earnest
consideration of Congress. Compared with the growth of our population,
the public expenditures have reached an amount unprecedented in our
history.
The population of the United States in 1790 was nearly 4,000,000
people. Increasing each decade about 33 per cent, it reached in 1860
31,000,000, an increase of 700 per cent on the population in 1790. In
1869 it is estimated that it will reach 38,000,000, or an increase of
868 per cent in seventy-nine years.
The annual expenditures of the Federal Government in 1791 were
$4,200,000; in 1820, $18.200,000; in 1850, forty-one millions; in 1860,
sixty-three millions; in 1865, nearly thirteen hundred millions; and in
1869 it is estimated by the Secretary of the Treasury, in his last
annual report, that they will be three hundred and seventy-two
millions.
By comparing the public disbursements of 1869, as estimated, with those
of 1791, it will be seen that the increase of expenditure since the
beginning of the Government has been 8,618 per cent, while the increase
of the population for the same period was only 868 per cent. Again, the
expenses of the Government in 1860, the year of peace immediately
preceding the war, were only sixty--three millions, while in 1869, the
year of peace three years after the war it is estimated they will be
three hundred and seventy-two millions, an increase of 489 per cent,
while the increase of population was only 21 per cent for the same
period.
These statistics further show that in 1791 the annual national
expenses, compared with the population, were little more than $1 per
capita, and in 1860 but $2 per capita; while in 1869 they will reach
the extravagant sum of $9.78 per capita.
It will be observed that all these statements refer to and exhibit the
disbursements of peace periods. It may, therefore, be of interest to
compare the expenditures of the three war periods--the war with Great
Britain, the Mexican War, and the War of the Rebellion.
In 1814 the annual expenses incident to the War of 1812 reached their
highest amount--about thirty-one millions--while our population
slightly exceeded 8,000,000, showing an expenditure of only $3.80 per
capita. In 1847 the expenditures growing out of the war with Mexico
reached fifty-five millions, and the population about 21,000,000,
giving only $2.60 per capita for the war expenses of that year. In 1865
the expenditures called for by the rebellion reached the vast amount of
twelve hundred and ninety millions, which, compared with a population
of 34,000,000, gives $38.20 per capita.
From the 4th day of March, 1789, to the 30th of June, 1861, the entire
expenditures of the Government were $1,700,000,000. During that period
we were engaged in wars with Great Britain and Mexico, and were
involved in hostilities with powerful Indian tribes; Louisiana was
purchased from France at a cost of $15,000,000; Florida was ceded to us
by Spain for five millions; California was acquired from Mexico for
fifteen millions, and the territory of New Mexico was obtained from
Texas for the sum of ten millions. Early in 1861 the War of the
Rebellion commenced; and from the 1st of July of that year to the 30th
of June, 1865, the public expenditures reached the enormous aggregate
of thirty-three hundred millions. Three years of peace have intervened,
and during that time the disbursements of the Government have
successively been five hundred and twenty millions, three hundred and
forty-six millions, and three hundred and ninety-three millions. Adding
to these amounts three hundred and seventy-two millions, estimated as
necessary for the fiscal year ending the 30th of June, 1869, we obtain
a total expenditure of $1,600,000,000 during the four years immediately
succeeding the war, or nearly as much as was expended during the
seventy-two years that preceded the rebellion and embraced the
extraordinary expenditures already named.
These startling facts clearly illustrate the necessity of retrenchment
in all branches of the public service. Abuses which were tolerated
during the war for the preservation of the nation will not be endured
by the people, now that profound peace prevails. The receipts from
internal revenues and customs have during the past three years
gradually diminished, and the continuance of useless and extravagant
expenditures will involve us in national bankruptcy, or else make
inevitable an increase of taxes already too onerous and in many
respects obnoxious on account of their inquisitorial character. One
hundred millions annually are expended for the military force, a large
portion of which is employed in the execution of laws both unnecessary
and unconstitutional; one hundred and fifty millions are required each
year to pay the interest on the public debt: an army of taxgatherers
impoverishes the nation, and public agents, placed by Congress beyond
the control of the Executive, divert from their legitimate purposes
large sums of money which they collect from the people in the name of
the Government. Judicious legislation and prudent economy can alone
remedy defects and avert evils which, if suffered to exist, can not
fail to diminish confidence in the public councils and weaken the
attachment and respect of the people toward their political
institutions. Without proper care the small balance which it is
estimated will remain in the Treasury at the close of the present
fiscal year will not be realized, and additional millions be added to a
debt which is now enumerated by billions.
It is shown by the able and comprehensive report of the Secretary of
the Treasury that the receipts for the fiscal year ending June 30,
1868, were $405,638,083, and that the expenditures for the same period
were $377,340,284, leaving in the Treasury a surplus of $28,297,798. It
is estimated that the receipts during the present fiscal year, ending
June 30, 1869, will be $341,392,868 and the expenditures $336,152,470,
showing a small balance of $5,240,398 in favor of the Government. For
the fiscal year ending June 30, 1870, it is estimated that the receipts
will amount to $327,000,000 and the expenditures to $303,000,000,
leaving an estimated surplus of $24,000,000.
It becomes proper in this connection to make a brief reference to our
public indebtedness, which has accumulated with such alarming rapidity
and assumed such colossal proportions.
In 1789, when the Government commenced operations under the Federal
Constitution, it was burdened with an indebtedness of $75,000,000,
created during the War of the Revolution. This amount had been reduced
to $45,000,000 when, in 1812, war was declared against Great Britain.
The three years' struggle that followed largely increased the national
obligations, and in 1816 they had attained the sum of $127,000,000.
Wise and economical legislation, however, enabled the Government to pay
the entire amount within a period of twenty years, and the
extinguishment of the national debt filled the land with rejoicing and
was one of the great events of President Jackson's Administration.
After its redemption a large fund remained in the Treasury, which was
deposited for safe-keeping with the several States. on condition that
it should be returned when required by the public wants. In 1849--the
year after the termination of an expensive war with Mexico--we found
ourselves involved in a debt of $64,000,000; and this was the amount
owed by the Government in 1860, just prior to the outbreak of the
rebellion. In the spring of 1861 our civil war commenced. Each year of
its continuance made an enormous addition to the debt: and when in the
spring of 1865, the nation successfully emerged from the conflict, the
obligations of the Government had reached the immense sum of
$2.873,992,909. The Secretary of the Treasury shows that on the 1st day
of November, 1867, this amount had been reduced to $2,491,504,450; but
at the same time his report exhibits an increase during the past year
of $35,625,102, for the debt on the 1st day of November last is stated
to have been $2,527,129,552. It is estimated by the Secretary that the
returns for the past month will add to our liabilities the further sum
of $11,000,000, making a total increase during thirteen months of
$46,500,000.
In my message to Congress December 4, 1865, it was suggested that a
policy should be devised which, without being oppressive to the people,
would at once begin to effect a reduction of the debt, and, if
persisted in, discharge it fully within a definite number of years. The
Secretary of the Treasury forcibly recommends legislation of this
character, and justly urges that the longer it is deferred the more
difficult must become its accomplishment. We should follow the wise
precedents established in 1789 and 1816, and without further delay make
provision for the payment of our obligations at as early a period as
may be practicable. The fruits of their labors should be enjoyed by our
citizens rather than used to build up and sustain moneyed monopolies in
our own and other lands. Our foreign debt is already computed by the
Secretary of the Treasury at $850,000,000; citizens of foreign
countries receive interest upon a large portion of our securities, and
American taxpayers are made to contribute large sums for their support.
The idea that such a debt is to become permanent should be at all times
discarded as involving taxation too heavy to be borne, and payment once
in every sixteen years, at the present rate of interest, of an amount
equal to the original sum. This vast debt, if permitted to become
permanent and increasing, must eventually be gathered into the hands of
a few, and enable them to exert a dangerous and controlling power in
the affairs of the Government. The borrowers would become servants to
the lenders, the lenders the masters of the people. We now pride
ourselves upon having given freedom to 4,000,000 of the colored race;
it will then be our shame that 40,000,000 of people, by their own
toleration of usurpation and profligacy, have suffered themselves to
become enslaved, and merely exchanged slave owners for new taskmasters
in the shape of bondholders and taxgatherers. Besides, permanent debts
pertain to monarchical governments, and, tending to monopolies,
perpetuities, and class legislation, are totally irreconcilable with
free institutions introduced into our republican system, they would
gradually but surely sap its foundations, eventually subvert our
governmental fabric, and erect upon its ruins a moneyed aristocracy. It
is our sacred duty to transmit unimpaired to our posterity the
blessings of liberty which were bequeathed to us by the founders of the
Republic. and by our example teach those who are to follow us carefully
to avoid the dangers which threaten a free and independent people.
Various plans have been proposed for the payment of the public debt.
However they may have varied as to the time and mode in which it should
be redeemed, there seems to be a general concurrence as to the
propriety and justness of a reduction in the present rate of interest.
The Secretary of the Treasury in his report recommends 5 per cent;
Congress, in a bill passed prior to adjournment on the 27th of July
last, agreed upon 4 and 4 1/2 per cent; while by many 3 per cent has
been held to be an amply sufficient return for the investment. The
general impression as to the exorbitancy of the existing rate of
interest has led to an inquiry in the public mind respecting the
consideration which the Government has actually received for its bonds,
and the conclusion is becoming prevalent that the amount which it
obtained was in real money three or four hundred per cent less than the
obligations which it issued in return. It can not be denied that we are
paying an extravagant percentage for the use of the money borrowed,
which was paper currency, greatly depreciated below the value of coin.
This fact is made apparent when we consider that bondholders receive
from the Treasury upon each dollar they own in Government securities 6
per cent in gold, which is nearly or quite equal to 9 per cent in
currency; that the bonds are then converted into capital for the
national banks, upon which those institutions issue their circulation,
bearing 6 per cent interest; and that they are exempt from taxation by
the Government and the States, and thereby enhanced 2 per cent in the
hands of the holders. We thus have an aggregate of 17 per cent which
may be received upon each dollar by the owners of Government
securities. A system that produces such results is justly regarded as
favoring a few at the expense of the many, and has led to the further
inquiry whether our bondholders, in view of the large profits which
they have enjoyed, would themselves be averse to a settlement of our
indebtedness upon a plan which would yield them a fair remuneration and
at the same time be just to the taxpayers of the nation. Our national
credit should be sacredly observed, but in making provision for our
creditors we should not forget what is due to the masses of the people.
It may be assumed that the holders of our securities have already
received upon their bonds a larger amount than their original
investment, measured by a gold standard. Upon this statement of facts
it would seem but just and equitable that the 6 per cent interest now
paid by the Government should be applied to the reduction of the
principal in semiannual installments, which in sixteen years and eight
months would liquidate the entire national debt. Six per cent in gold
would at present rates be equal to 9 per cent in currency, and
equivalent to the payment of the debt one and a half times in a
fraction less than seventeen years. This, in connection with all the
other advantages derived from their investment, would afford to the
public creditors a fair and liberal compensation for the use of their
capital, and with this they should be satisfied. The lessons of the
past admonish the lender that it is not well to be over-anxious in
exacting from the borrower rigid compliance with the letter of the
bond.