And he added that--

The Constitution, public treaties, and the laws oblige the President to

regard Texas as an independent state, and its territory as no part of

the territory of Mexico.

Texas had been an independent state, with an organized government,

defying the power of Mexico to overthrow or reconquer her, for more than

ten years before Mexico commenced the present war against the United

States. Texas had given such evidence to the world of her ability to

maintain her separate existence as an independent nation that she had

been formally recognized as such not only by the United States, but by

several of the principal powers of Europe. These powers had entered into

treaties of amity, commerce, and navigation with her. They had received

and accredited her ministers and other diplomatic agents at their

respective courts, and they had commissioned ministers and diplomatic

agents on their part to the Government of Texas. If Mexico,

notwithstanding all this and her utter inability to subdue or reconquer

Texas, still stubbornly refused to recognize her as an independent

nation, she was none the less so on that account. Mexico herself had

been recognized as an independent nation by the United States and by

other powers many years before Spain, of which before her revolution she

had been a colony, would agree to recognize her as such; and yet Mexico

was at that time in the estimation of the civilized world, and in fact,

none the less an independent power because Spain still claimed her as a

colony. If Spain had continued until the present period to assert that

Mexico was one of her colonies in rebellion against her, this would not

have made her so or changed the fact of her independent existence. Texas

at the period of her annexation to the United States bore the same

relation to Mexico that Mexico had borne to Spain for many years before

Spain acknowledged her independence, with this important difference,

that before the annexation of Texas to the United States was consummated

Mexico herself, by a formal act of her Government, had acknowledged the

independence of Texas as a nation. It is true that in the act of

recognition she prescribed a condition which she had no power or

authority to impose--that Texas should not annex herself to any other

power--but this could not detract in any degree from the recognition

which Mexico then made of her actual independence. Upon this plain

statement of facts, it is absurd for Mexico to allege as a pretext for

commencing hostilities against the United States that Texas is still a

part of her territory.

But there are those who, conceding all this to be true, assume the

ground that the true western boundary of Texas is the Nueces instead of

the Rio Grande, and that therefore in marching our Army to the east bank

of the latter river we passed the Texan line and invaded the territory

of Mexico. A simple statement of facts known to exist will conclusively

refute such an assumption. Texas, as ceded to the United States by

France in 1803, has been always claimed as extending west to the Rio

Grande or Rio Bravo. This fact is established by the authority of our

most eminent statesmen at a period when the question was as well, if not

better, understood than it is at present. During Mr. Jefferson's

Administration Messrs. Monroe and Pinckney, who had been sent on a

special mission to Madrid, charged among other things with the

adjustment of boundary between the two countries, in a note addressed to

the Spanish minister of foreign affairs under date of the 28th of

January, 1805, assert that the boundaries of Louisiana, as ceded to the

United States by France, "are the river Perdido on the east and the

river Bravo on the west," and they add that "the facts and principles

which justify this conclusion are so satisfactory to our Government as

to convince it that the United States have not a better right to the

island of New Orleans under the cession referred to than they have to

the whole district of territory which is above described." Down to the

conclusion of the Florida treaty, in February, 1819, by which this

territory was ceded to Spain, the United States asserted and maintained

their territorial rights to this extent. In the month of June, 1818,

during Mr. Monroe's Administration, information having been received

that a number of foreign adventurers had landed at Galveston with the

avowed purpose of forming a settlement in that vicinity, a special

messenger was dispatched by the Government of the United States with

instructions from the Secretary of State to warn them to desist, should

they be found there, "or any other place north of the Rio Bravo, and

within the territory claimed by the United States." He was instructed,

should they be found in the country north of that river, to make known

to them "the surprise with which the President has seen possession thus

taken, without authority from the United States, of a place within their

territorial limits, and upon which no lawful settlement can be made

without their sanction." He was instructed to call upon them to "avow

under what national authority they profess to act," and to give them due

warning "that the place is within the United States, who will suffer no

permanent settlement to be made there under any authority other than

their own." As late as the 8th of July, 1842, the Secretary of State of

the United States, in a note addressed to our minister in Mexico,

maintains that by the Florida treaty of 1819 the territory as far west

as the Rio Grande was confirmed to Spain. In that note he states that--

By the treaty of the 22d of February, 1819, between the United States

and Spain, the Sabine was adopted as the line of boundary between the

two powers. Up to that period no considerable colonization had been

effected in Texas; but the territory between the Sabine and the Rio

Grande being confirmed to Spain by the treaty, applications were made

to that power for grants of land, and such grants or permissions of

settlement were in fact made by the Spanish authorities in favor of

citizens of the United States proposing to emigrate to _Texas_ in

numerous families before the declaration of independence by Mexico.

The Texas which was ceded to Spain by the Florida treaty of 1819

embraced all the country now claimed by the State of Texas between the

Nueces and the Rio Grande. The Republic of Texas always claimed this

river as her western boundary, and in her treaty made with Santa Anna in

May, 1836, he recognized it as such. By the constitution which Texas

adopted in March, 1836, senatorial and representative districts were

organized extending west of the Nueces. The Congress of Texas on the

19th of December, 1836, passed "An act to define the boundaries of the

Republic of Texas," in which they declared the Rio Grande from its mouth

to its source to be their boundary, and by the said act they extended

their "civil and political jurisdiction" over the country up to that

boundary. During a period of more than nine years which intervened

between the adoption of her constitution and her annexation as one of

the States of our Union Texas asserted and exercised many acts of

sovereignty and jurisdiction over the territory and inhabitants west of

the Nueces. She organized and defined the limits of counties extending

to the Rio Grande; she established courts of justice and extended her

judicial system over the territory; she established a custom-house and

collected duties, and also post-offices and post-roads, in it; she

established a land office and issued numerous grants for land within its

limits; a senator and a representative residing in it were elected to

the Congress of the Republic and served as such before the act of

annexation took place. In both the Congress and convention of Texas

which gave their assent to the terms of annexation to the United States

proposed by our Congress were representatives residing west of the

Nueces, who took part in the act of annexation itself. This was the

Texas which by the act of our Congress of the 29th of December, 1845,

was admitted as one of the States of our Union. That the Congress of the

United States understood the State of Texas which they admitted into the

Union to extend beyond the Nueces is apparent from the fact that on the

31st of December, 1845, only two days after the act of admission, they

passed a law "to establish a collection district in the State of Texas,"

by which they created a port of delivery at Corpus Christi, situated

west of the Nueces, and being the same point at which the Texas

custom-house under the laws of that Republic had been located, and

directed that a surveyor to collect the revenue should be appointed for

that port by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the

Senate. A surveyor was accordingly nominated, and confirmed by the

Senate, and has been ever since in the performance of his duties. All

these acts of the Republic of Texas and of our Congress preceded the

orders for the advance of our Army to the east bank of the Rio Grande.

Subsequently Congress passed an act "establishing certain post routes"

extending west of the Nueces. The country west of that river now

constitutes a part of one of the Congressional districts of Texas and is

represented in the House of Representatives. The Senators from that

State were chosen by a legislature in which the country west of that

river was represented. In view of all these facts it is difficult to

conceive upon what ground it can be maintained that in occupying the

country west of the Nueces with our Army, with a view solely to its

security and defense, we invaded the territory of Mexico. But it would

have been still more difficult to justify the Executive, whose duty it

is to see that the laws be faithfully executed, if in the face of all

these proceedings, both of the Congress of Texas and of the United

States, he had assumed the responsibility of yielding up the territory

west of the Nueces to Mexico or of refusing to protect and defend this

territory and its inhabitants, including Corpus Christi as well as the

remainder of Texas, against the threatened Mexican invasion.

But Mexico herself has never placed the war which she has waged upon the

ground that our Army occupied the intermediate territory between the

Nueces and the Rio Grande. Her refuted pretension that Texas was not in

fact an independent state, but a rebellious province, was obstinately

persevered in, and her avowed purpose in commencing a war with the

United States was to reconquer Texas and to restore Mexican authority

over the whole territory--not to the Nueces only, but to the Sabine. In

view of the proclaimed menaces of Mexico to this effect, I deemed it my

duty, as a measure of precaution and defense, to order our Army to

occupy a position on our frontier as a military post, from which our

troops could best resist and repel any attempted invasion which Mexico

might make. Our Army had occupied a position at Corpus Christi, west of

the Nueces, as early as August, 1845, without complaint from any

quarter. Had the Nueces been regarded as the true western boundary of

Texas, that boundary had been passed by our Army many months before it

advanced to the eastern bank of the Rio Grande. In my annual message of

December last I informed Congress that upon the invitation of both the

Congress and convention of Texas I had deemed it proper to order a

strong squadron to the coasts of Mexico and to concentrate an efficient

military force on the western frontier of Texas to protect and defend

the inhabitants against the menaced invasion of Mexico. In that message

I informed Congress that the moment the terms of annexation offered by

the United States were accepted by Texas the latter became so far a part

of our own country as to make it our duty to afford such protection and

defense, and that for that purpose our squadron had been ordered to the

Gulf and our Army to take a "position between the Nueces and the Del

Norte" or Rio Grande and to "repel any invasion of the Texan territory

which might be attempted by the Mexican forces."

It was deemed proper to issue this order, because soon after the

President of Texas, in April, 1845, had issued his proclamation

convening the Congress of that Republic for the purpose of submitting to

that body the terms of annexation proposed by the United States the

Government of Mexico made serious threats of invading the Texan

territory. These threats became more imposing as it became more apparent

in the progress of the question that the people of Texas would decide in

favor of accepting the terms of annexation, and finally they had assumed

such a formidable character as induced both the Congress and convention

of Texas to request that a military force should be sent by the United

States into her territory for the purpose of protecting and defending

her against the threatened invasion. It would have been a violation of

good faith toward the people of Texas to have refused to afford the aid

which they desired against a threatened invasion to which they had been

exposed by their free determination to annex themselves to our Union in

compliance with the overture made to them by the joint resolution of our

Congress. Accordingly, a portion of the Army was ordered to advance into

Texas. Corpus Christi was the position selected by General Taylor. He

encamped at that place in August, 1845, and the Army remained in that

position until the 11th of March, 1846, when it moved westward, and on

the 28th of that month reached the east bank of the Rio Grande opposite

to Matamoras. This movement was made in pursuance of orders from the War

Department, issued on the 13th of January, 1846. Before these orders

were issued the dispatch of our minister in Mexico transmitting the

decision of the council of government of Mexico advising that he should

not be received, and also the dispatch of our consul residing in the

City of Mexico, the former bearing date on the 17th and the latter on

the 18th of December, 1845, copies of both of which accompanied my

message to Congress of the 11th of May last, were received at the

Department of State. These communications rendered it highly probable,

if not absolutely certain, that our minister would not be received by

the Government of General Herrera. It was also well known that but

little hope could be entertained of a different result from General

Paredes in case the revolutionary movement which he was prosecuting

should prove successful, as was highly probable. The partisans of

Paredes, as our minister in the dispatch referred to states, breathed

the fiercest hostility against the United States, denounced the proposed

negotiation as treason, and openly called upon the troops and the people

to put down the Government of Herrera by force. The reconquest of Texas

and war with the United States were openly threatened. These were the

circumstances existing when it was deemed proper to order the Army under

the command of General Taylor to advance to the western frontier of

Texas and occupy a position on or near the Rio Grande.

The apprehensions of a contemplated Mexican invasion have been since

fully justified by the event. The determination of Mexico to rush into

hostilities with the United States was afterwards manifested from the

whole tenor of the note of the Mexican minister of foreign affairs to

our minister bearing date on the 12th of March, 1846. Paredes had then

revolutionized the Government, and his minister, after referring to the

resolution for the annexation of Texas which had been adopted by our

Congress in March, 1845, proceeds to declare that--

A fact such as this, or, to speak with greater exactness, so notable an

act of usurpation, created an imperious necessity that Mexico, for her

own honor, should repel it with proper firmness and dignity. The supreme

Government had beforehand declared that it would look upon such an act

as a _casus belli_, and as a consequence of this declaration negotiation

was by its very nature at an end, and war was the only recourse of the

Mexican Government.

It appears also that on the 4th of April following General Paredes,

through his minister of war, issued orders to the Mexican general in

command on the Texan frontier to "attack" our Army "by every means which

war permits." To this General Paredes had been pledged to the army and

people of Mexico during the military revolution which had brought him

into power. On the 18th of April, 1846, General Paredes addressed a

letter to the commander on that frontier in which he stated to him: "At

the present date I suppose you, at the head of that valiant army, either

fighting already or preparing for the operations of a campaign;" and,

"Supposing you already on the theater of operations and with all the

forces assembled, it is indispensable that hostilities be commenced,

yourself taking the initiative against the enemy."

The movement of our Army to the Rio Grande was made by the commanding

general under positive orders to abstain from all aggressive acts toward

Mexico or Mexican citizens, and to regard the relations between the two

countries as peaceful unless Mexico should declare war or commit acts of

hostility indicative of a state of war, and these orders he faithfully

executed. Whilst occupying his position on the east bank of the Rio

Grande, within the limits of Texas, then recently admitted as one of the

States of our Union, the commanding general of the Mexican forces, who,

in pursuance of the orders of his Government, had collected a large army

on the opposite shore of the Rio Grande, crossed the river, invaded our

territory, and commenced hostilities by attacking our forces. Thus,

after all the injuries which we had received and borne from Mexico, and

after she had insultingly rejected a minister sent to her on a mission

of peace, and whom she had solemnly agreed to receive, she consummated

her long course of outrage against our country by commencing an

offensive war and shedding the blood of our citizens on our own soil.

The United States never attempted to acquire Texas by conquest. On the

contrary, at an early period after the people of Texas had achieved

their independence they sought to be annexed to the United States. At a

general election in September, 1836, they decided with great unanimity

in favor of "annexation," and in November following the Congress of the

Republic authorized the appointment of a minister to bear their request

to this Government. This Government, however, having remained neutral

between Texas and Mexico during the war between them, and considering it

due to the honor of our country and our fair fame among the nations of

the earth that we should not at this early period consent to annexation,

nor until it should be manifest to the whole world that the reconquest

of Texas by Mexico was impossible, refused to accede to the overtures

made by Texas. On the 12th of April, 1844, after more than seven years

had elapsed since Texas had established her independence, a treaty was

concluded for the annexation of that Republic to the United States,

which was rejected by the Senate. Finally, on the 1st of March, 1845,

Congress passed a joint resolution for annexing her to the United States

upon certain preliminary conditions to which her assent was required.

The solemnities which characterized the deliberations and conduct of the

Government and people of Texas on the deeply interesting questions

presented by these resolutions are known to the world. The Congress, the

Executive, and the people of Texas, in a convention elected for that

purpose, accepted with great unanimity the proposed terms of annexation,

and thus consummated on her part the great act of restoring to our

Federal Union a vast territory which had been ceded to Spain by the

Florida treaty more than a quarter of a century before.

After the joint resolution for the annexation of Texas to the United

States had been passed by our Congress the Mexican minister at

Washington addressed a note to the Secretary of State, bearing date on

the 6th of March, 1845, protesting against it as "an act of aggression

the most unjust which can be found recorded in the annals of modern

history, namely, that of despoiling a friendly nation like Mexico of a

considerable portion of her territory," and protesting against the

resolution of annexation as being an act "whereby the Province of Texas,

an integral portion of the Mexican territory, is agreed and admitted

into the American Union;" and he announced that as a consequence his

mission to the United States had terminated, and demanded his passports,

which were granted. It was upon the absurd pretext, made by Mexico

(herself indebted for her independence to a successful revolution), that

the Republic of Texas still continued to be, notwithstanding all that

had passed, a Province of Mexico that this step was taken by the Mexican

minister.

Every honorable effort has been used by me to avoid the war which

followed, but all have proved vain. All our attempts to preserve peace

have been met by insult and resistance on the part of Mexico. My efforts

to this end commenced in the note of the Secretary of State of the 10th

of March, 1845, in answer to that of the Mexican minister. Whilst

declining to reopen a discussion which had already been exhausted, and

proving again what was known to the whole world, that Texas had long

since achieved her independence, the Secretary of State expressed the

regret of this Government that Mexico should have taken offense at the

resolution of annexation passed by Congress, and gave assurance that our

"most strenuous efforts shall be devoted to the amicable adjustment of

every cause of complaint between the two Governments and to the

cultivation of the kindest and most friendly relations between the

sister Republics." That I have acted in the spirit of this assurance

will appear from the events which have since occurred. Notwithstanding

Mexico had abruptly terminated all diplomatic intercourse with the

United States, and ought, therefore, to have been the first to ask for

its resumption, yet, waiving all ceremony, I embraced the earliest

favorable opportunity "to ascertain from the Mexican Government whether

they would receive an envoy from the United States intrusted With full

power to adjust all the questions in dispute between the two

Governments." In September, 1845, I believed the propitious moment for

such an overture had arrived. Texas, by the enthusiastic and almost

unanimous will of her people, had pronounced in favor of annexation.

Mexico herself had agreed to acknowledge the independence of Texas,

subject to a condition, it is true, which she had no right to impose and

no power to enforce. The last lingering hope of Mexico, if she still

could have retained any, that Texas would ever again become one of her

Provinces, must have been abandoned.

The consul of the United States at the City of Mexico was therefore

instructed by the Secretary of State on the 15th of September, 1845, to

make the inquiry of the Mexican Government. The inquiry was made, and

on the 15th of October, 1845, the minister of foreign affairs of the

Mexican Government, in a note addressed to our consul, gave a favorable

response, requesting at the same time that our naval force might be

withdrawn from Vera Cruz while negotiations should be pending. Upon the

receipt of this note our naval force was promptly withdrawn from Vera

Cruz. A minister was immediately appointed, and departed to Mexico.

Everything bore a promising aspect for a speedy and peaceful adjustment

of all our difficulties. At the date of my annual message to Congress in

December last no doubt was entertained but that he would be received by

the Mexican Government, and the hope was cherished that all cause of

misunderstanding between the two countries would be speedily removed.

In the confident hope that such would be the result of his mission,

I informed Congress that I forbore at that time to "recommend such

ulterior measures of redress for the wrongs and injuries we had so long

borne as it would have been proper to make had no such negotiation been

instituted." To my surprise and regret the Mexican Government, though

solemnly pledged to do so, upon the arrival of our minister in Mexico

refused to receive and accredit him. When he reached Vera Cruz, on

the 30th of November, 1845, he found that the aspect of affairs had

undergone an unhappy change. The Government of General Herrera, who was

at that time President of the Republic, was tottering to its fall.

General Paredes, a military leader, had manifested his determination to

overthrow the Government of Herrera by a military revolution, and one of

the principal means which he employed to effect his purpose and render

the Government of Herrera odious to the army and people of Mexico was by

loudly condemning its determination to receive a minister of peace from

the United States, alleging that it was the intention of Herrera, by a

treaty with the United States, to dismember the territory of Mexico by

ceding away the department of Texas. The Government of Herrera is

believed to have been well disposed to a pacific adjustment of existing

difficulties, but probably alarmed for its own security, and in order

to ward off the danger of the revolution led by Paredes, violated its

solemn agreement and refused to receive or accredit our minister; and

this although informed that he had been invested with full power to

adjust all questions in dispute between the two Governments. Among the

frivolous pretexts for this refusal, the principal one was that our

minister had not gone upon a special mission confined to the question of

Texas alone, leaving all the outrages upon our flag and our citizens

unredressed. The Mexican Government well knew that both our national

honor and the protection due to our citizens imperatively required that

the two questions of boundary and indemnity should be treated of

together, as naturally and inseparably blended, and they ought to have

seen that this course was best calculated to enable the United States to

extend to them the most liberal justice. On the 30th of December, 1845,

General Herrera resigned the Presidency and yielded up the Government to

General Paredes without a struggle. Thus a revolution was accomplished

solely by the army commanded by Paredes, and the supreme power in Mexico

passed into the hands of a military usurper who was known to be bitterly

hostile to the United States.

Although the prospect of a pacific adjustment with the new Government

was unpromising from the known hostility of its head to the United

States, yet, determined that nothing should be left undone on our part

to restore friendly relations between the two countries, our minister

was instructed to present his credentials to the new Government and ask

to be accredited by it in the diplomatic character in which he had been

commissioned. These instructions he executed by his note of the 1st of

March, 1846, addressed to the Mexican minister of foreign affairs, but

his request was insultingly refused by that minister in his answer of

the 12th of the same month. No alternative remained for our minister but

to demand his passports and return to the United States.

Thus was the extraordinary spectacle presented to the civilized world of

a Government, in violation of its own express agreement, having twice

rejected a minister of peace invested with full powers to adjust all

the existing differences between the two countries in a manner just

and honorable to both. I am not aware that modern history presents a

parallel case in which in time of peace one nation has refused even to

hear propositions from another for terminating existing difficulties

between them. Scarcely a hope of adjusting our difficulties, even at a

remote day, or of preserving peace with Mexico, could be cherished while

Paredes remained at the head of the Government. He had acquired the

supreme power by a military revolution and upon the most solemn pledges

to wage war against the United States and to reconquer Texas, which he

claimed as a revolted province of Mexico. He had denounced as guilty

of treason all those Mexicans who considered Texas as no longer

constituting a part of the territory of Mexico and who were friendly to

the cause of peace. The duration of the war which he waged against the

United States was indefinite, because the end which he proposed of the

reconquest of Texas was hopeless. Besides, there was good reason to

believe from all his conduct that it was his intention to convert the

Republic of Mexico into a monarchy and to call a foreign European prince

to the throne. Preparatory to this end, he had during his short rule

destroyed the liberty of the press, tolerating that portion of it only

which openly advocated the establishment of a monarchy. The better to

secure the success of his ultimate designs, he had by an arbitrary

decree convoked a Congress, not to be elected by the free voice of the

people, but to be chosen in a manner to make them subservient to his

will and to give him absolute control over their deliberations.

Under all these circumstances it was believed that any revolution in

Mexico founded upon opposition to the ambitious projects of Paredes

would tend to promote the cause of peace as well as prevent any

attempted European interference in the affairs of the North American

continent, both objects of deep interest to the United States. Any such

foreign interference, if attempted, must have been resisted by the

United States. My views upon that subject were fully communicated to

Congress in my last annual message. In any event, it was certain that no

change whatever in the Government of Mexico which would deprive Paredes

of power could be for the worse so far as the United States were

concerned, while it was highly probable that any change must be for the

better. This was the state of affairs existing when Congress, on the

13th of May last, recognized the existence of the war which had been

commenced by the Government of Paredes; and it became an object of much

importance, with a view to a speedy settlement of our difficulties and

the restoration of an honorable peace, that Paredes should not retain

power in Mexico.

Before that time there were symptoms of a revolution in Mexico, favored,

as it was understood to be, by the more liberal party, and especially by

those who were opposed to foreign interference and to the monarchical

form of government. Santa Anna was then in exile in Havana, having been

expelled from power and banished from his country by a revolution which

occurred in December, 1844; but it was known that he had still a

considerable party in his favor in Mexico. It was also equally well

known that no vigilance which could be exerted by our squadron would in

all probability have prevented him from effecting a landing somewhere

on the extensive Gulf coast of Mexico if he desired to return to his

country. He had openly professed an entire change of policy, had

expressed his regret that he had subverted the federal constitution of

1824, and avowed that he was now in favor of its restoration. He had

publicly declared his hostility, in strongest terms, to the

establishment of a monarchy and to European interference in the affairs

of his country. Information to this effect had been received, from

sources believed to be reliable, at the date of the recognition of the

existence of the war by Congress, and was afterwards fully confirmed by

the receipt of the dispatch of our consul in the City of Mexico, with

the accompanying documents, which are herewith transmitted. Besides, it

was reasonable to suppose that he must see the ruinous consequences to

Mexico of a war with the United States, and that it would be his

interest to favor peace.

It was under these circumstances and upon these considerations that it

was deemed expedient not to obstruct his return to Mexico should he

attempt to do so. Our object was the restoration of peace, and, with

that view, no reason was perceived why we should take part with Paredes

and aid him by means of our blockade in preventing the return of his

rival to Mexico. On the contrary, it was believed that the intestine

divisions which ordinary sagacity could not but anticipate as the fruit

of Santa Anna's return to Mexico, and his contest with Paredes, might

strongly tend to produce a disposition with both parties to restore and

preserve peace with the United States. Paredes was a soldier by

profession and a monarchist in principle. He had but recently before

been successful in a military revolution, by which he had obtained

power. He was the sworn enemy of the United States, with which he had

involved his country in the existing war. Santa Anna had been expelled

from power by the army, was known to be in open hostility to Paredes,

and publicly pledged against foreign intervention and the restoration of

monarchy in Mexico. In view of these facts and circumstances it was that

when orders were issued to the commander of our naval forces in the

Gulf, on the 13th day of May last, the same day on which the existence

of the war was recognized by Congress, to place the coasts of Mexico

under blockade, he was directed not to obstruct the passage of Santa

Anna to Mexico should he attempt to return.

A revolution took place in Mexico in the early part of August following,

by which the power of Paredes was overthrown, and he has since been

banished from the country, and is now in exile. Shortly afterwards Santa

Anna returned. It remains to be seen whether his return may not yet

prove to be favorable to a pacific adjustment of the existing

difficulties, it being manifestly his interest not to persevere in the

prosecution of a war commenced by Paredes to accomplish a purpose so

absurd as the reconquest of Texas to the Sabine. Had Paredes remained in

power, it is morally certain that any pacific adjustment would have been

hopeless.

Upon the commencement of hostilities by Mexico against the United States

the indignant spirit of the nation was at once aroused. Congress

promptly responded to the expectations of the country, and by the act of

the 13th of May last recognized the fact that war existed, by the act of

Mexico, between the United States and that Republic, and granted the

means necessary for its vigorous prosecution. Being involved in a war

thus commenced by Mexico, and for the justice of which on our part we

may confidently appeal to the whole world, I resolved to prosecute it

with the utmost vigor. Accordingly the ports of Mexico on the Gulf and

on the Pacific have been placed under blockade and her territory invaded

at several important points. The reports from the Departments of War and

of the Navy will inform you more in detail of the measures adopted in

the emergency in which our country was placed and of the gratifying

results which have been accomplished.

The various columns of the Army have performed their duty under great

disadvantages with the most distinguished skill and courage. The

victories of Palo Alto and Resaca de la Palma and of Monterey, won

against greatly superior numbers and against most decided advantages in

other respects on the part of the enemy, were brilliant in their

execution, and entitle our brave officers and soldiers to the grateful

thanks of their country. The nation deplores the loss of the brave

officers and men who have gallantly fallen while vindicating and

defending their country's rights and honor.

It is a subject of pride and satisfaction that our volunteer citizen

soldiers, who so promptly responded to their country's call, with an

experience of the discipline of a camp of only a few weeks, have borne

their part in the hard-fought battle of Monterey with a constancy and

courage equal to that of veteran troops and worthy of the highest

admiration. The privations of long marches through the enemy's country

and through a wilderness have been borne without a murmur. By rapid

movements the Province of New Mexico, with Santa Fe, its capital, has

been captured without bloodshed. The Navy has cooperated with the Army

and rendered important services; if not so brilliant, it is because the

enemy had no force to meet them on their own element and because of the

defenses which nature has interposed in the difficulties of the

navigation on the Mexican coast. Our squadron in the Pacific, with the

cooperation of a gallant officer of the Army and a small force hastily

collected in that distant country, has acquired bloodless possession of

the Californias, and the American flag has been raised at every

important point in that Province.

I congratulate you on the success which has thus attended our military

and naval operations. In less than seven months after Mexico commenced

hostilities, at a time selected by herself, we have taken possession of

many of her principal ports, driven back and pursued her invading army,

and acquired military possession of the Mexican Provinces of New Mexico,

New Leon, Coahuila, Tamaulipas, and the Californias, a territory larger

in extent than that embraced in the original thirteen States of the

Union, inhabited by a considerable population, and much of it more than

1,000 miles from the points at which we had to collect our forces and

commence our movements. By the blockade the import and export trade of

the enemy has been cut off. Well may the American people be proud of the

energy and gallantry of our regular and volunteer officers and soldiers.

The events of these few months afford a gratifying proof that our

country can under any emergency confidently rely for the maintenance of

her honor and the defense of her rights on an effective force, ready at

all times voluntarily to relinquish the comforts of home for the perils

and privations of the camp. And though such a force may be for the time

expensive, it is in the end economical, as the ability to command it

removes the necessity of employing a large standing army in time of

peace, and proves that our people love their institutions and are ever

ready to defend and protect them.

While the war was in a course of vigorous and successful prosecution,

being still anxious to arrest its evils, and considering that after the

brilliant victories of our arms on the 8th and 9th of May last the

national honor could not be compromitted by it, another overture was

made to Mexico, by my direction, on the 27th of July last to terminate

hostilities by a peace just and honorable to both countries. On the 31st

of August following the Mexican Government declined to accept this

friendly overture, but referred it to the decision of a Mexican Congress

to be assembled in the early part of the present month. I communicate to

you herewith a copy of the letter of the Secretary of State proposing to

reopen negotiations, of the answer of the Mexican Government, and of the

reply thereto of the Secretary of State.

The war will continue to be prosecuted with vigor as the best means of

securing peace. It is hoped that the decision of the Mexican Congress,

to which our last overture has been referred, may result in a speedy and

honorable peace. With our experience, however, of the unreasonable

course of the Mexican authorities, it is the part of wisdom not to relax

in the energy of our military operations until the result is made known.

In this view it is deemed important to hold military possession of all

the Provinces which have been taken until a definitive treaty of peace

shall have been concluded and ratified by the two countries.

The war has not been waged with a view to conquest, but, having been

commenced by Mexico, it has been carried into the enemy's country and

will be vigorously prosecuted there with a view to obtain an honorable

peace, and thereby secure ample indemnity for the expenses of the war,

as well as to our much-injured citizens, who hold large pecuniary

demands against Mexico.

By the laws of nations a conquered country is subject to be governed by

the conqueror during his military possession and until there is either a

treaty of peace or he shall voluntarily withdraw from it. The old civil

government being necessarily superseded, it is the right and duty of the

conqueror to secure his conquest and to provide for the maintenance of

civil order and the rights of the inhabitants. This right has been

exercised and this duty performed by our military and naval commanders

by the establishment of temporary governments in some of the conquered

Provinces of Mexico, assimilating them as far as practicable to the free

institutions of our own country. In the Provinces of New Mexico and of

the Californias little, if any, further resistance is apprehended from

the inhabitants to the temporary governments which have thus, from the

necessity of the case and according to the laws of war, been

established. It may be proper to provide for the security of these

important conquests by making an adequate appropriation for the purpose

of erecting fortifications and defraying the expenses necessarily

incident to the maintenance of our possession and authority over them.

Near the close of your last session, for reasons communicated to

Congress, I deemed it important as a measure for securing a speedy peace

with Mexico, that a sum of money should be appropriated and placed in

the power of the Executive, similar to that which had been made upon two

former occasions during the Administration of President Jefferson.

On the 26th of February, 1803, an appropriation of $2,000,000 was made

and placed at the disposal of the President. Its object is well known.

It was at that time in contemplation to acquire Louisiana from France,

and it was intended to be applied as a part of the consideration which

might be paid for that territory. On the 13th of February, 1806, the

same sum was in like manner appropriated, with a view to the purchase of

the Floridas from Spain. These appropriations were made to facilitate

negotiations and as a means to enable the President to accomplish the

important objects in view. Though it did not become necessary for the

President to use these appropriations, yet a state of things might have

arisen in which it would have been highly important for him to do so,

and the wisdom of making them can not be doubted. It is believed that

the measure recommended at your last session met with the approbation of

decided majorities in both Houses of Congress. Indeed, in different

forms, a bill making an appropriation of $2,000,000 passed each House,

and it is much to be regretted that it did not become a law. The reasons

which induced me to recommend the measure at that time still exist, and

I again submit the subject for your consideration and suggest the

importance of early action upon it. Should the appropriation be made and

be not needed, it will remain in the Treasury; should it be deemed

proper to apply it in whole or in part, it will be accounted for as

other public expenditures.

Immediately after Congress had recognized the existence of the war with

Mexico my attention was directed to the danger that privateers might be

fitted out in the ports of Cuba and Porto Rico to prey upon the commerce

of the United States, and I invited the special attention of the Spanish

Government to the fourteenth article of our treaty with that power of

the 27th of October, 1795, under which the citizens and subjects of

either nation who shall take commissions or letters of marque to act as

privateers against the other "shall be punished as pirates."

It affords me pleasure to inform you that I have received assurances

from the Spanish Government that this article of the treaty shall be

faithfully observed on its part. Orders for this purpose were

immediately transmitted from that Government to the authorities of Cuba

and Porto Rico to exert their utmost vigilance in preventing any

attempts to fit out privateers in those islands against the United

States. From the good faith of Spain I am fully satisfied that this

treaty will be executed in its spirit as well as its letter, whilst the

United States will on their part faithfully perform all the obligations

which it imposes on them.

Information has been recently received at the Department of State that

the Mexican Government has sent to Havana blank commissions to

privateers and blank certificates of naturalization signed by General

Salas, the present head of the Mexican Government. There is also reason

to apprehend that similar documents have been transmitted to other parts

of the world. Copies of these papers, in translation, are herewith

transmitted.

As the preliminaries required by the practice of civilized nations for

commissioning privateers and regulating their conduct appear not to have

been observed, and as these commissions are in blank, to be filled up

with the names of citizens and subjects of all nations who may be

willing to purchase them, the whole proceeding can only be construed as

an invitation to all the freebooters upon earth who are willing to pay

for the privilege to cruise against American commerce. It will be for

our courts of justice to decide whether under such circumstances these

Mexican letters of marque and reprisal shall protect those who accept

them, and commit robberies upon the high seas under their authority,

from the pains and penalties of piracy.

If the certificates of naturalization thus granted be intended by Mexico

to shield Spanish subjects from the guilt and punishment of pirates

under our treaty with Spain, they will certainly prove unavailing. Such

a subterfuge would be but a weak device to defeat the provisions of a

solemn treaty.

I recommend that Congress should immediately provide by law for the

trial and punishment as pirates of Spanish subjects who, escaping the

vigilance of their Government, shall be found guilty of privateering

against the United States. I do not apprehend serious danger from these

privateers. Our Navy will be constantly on the alert to protect our

commerce. Besides, in case prizes should be made of American vessels,

the utmost vigilance will be exerted by our blockading squadron to

prevent the captors from taking them into Mexican ports, and it is not

apprehended that any nation will violate its neutrality by suffering

such prizes to be condemned and sold within its jurisdiction.

I recommend that Congress should immediately provide by law for granting

letters of marque and reprisal against vessels under the Mexican flag.

It is true that there are but few, if any, commercial vessels of Mexico

upon the high seas, and it is therefore not probable that many American

privateers would be fitted out in case a law should pass authorizing

this mode of warfare. It is, notwithstanding, certain that such

privateers may render good service to the commercial interests of the

country by recapturing our merchant ships should any be taken by armed

vessels under the Mexican flag, as well as by capturing these vessels

themselves. Every means within our power should be rendered available

for the protection of our commerce.

The annual report of the Secretary of the Treasury will exhibit a

detailed statement of the condition of the finances. The imports for the

fiscal year ending on the 30th of June last were of the value of

$121,691,797, of which the amount exported was $11,346,623, leaving the

amount retained in the country for domestic consumption $110,345,174.

The value of the exports for the same period was $113,488,516, of which

$102,141,893 consisted of domestic productions and $11,346,623 of

foreign articles.

The receipts into the Treasury for the same year were $29,499,247.06, of

which there was derived from customs $26,712,667.87, from the sales of

public lands $2,694,452.48, and from incidental and miscellaneous

sources $92,126.71. The expenditures for the same period were

$28,031,114.20, and the balance in the Treasury on the 1st day of July

last was $9,126,439.08.

The amount of the public debt, including Treasury notes, on the 1st of

the present month was $24,256,494.60, of which the sum of $17,788,799.62

was outstanding on the 4th of March, 1845, leaving the amount incurred

since that time $6,467,694.98.

In order to prosecute the war with Mexico with vigor and energy, as the

best means of bringing it to a speedy and honorable termination, a

further loan will be necessary to meet the expenditures for the present

and the next fiscal year. If the war should be continued until the 30th

of June, 1848, being the end of the next fiscal year, it is estimated

that an additional loan of $23,000,000 will be required. This estimate

is made upon the assumption that it will be necessary to retain

constantly in the Treasury $4,000,000 to guard against contingencies.

If such surplus were not required to be retained, then a loan of

$19,000,000 would be sufficient. If, however, Congress should at the

present session impose a revenue duty on the principal articles now

embraced in the free list, it is estimated that an additional annual

revenue of about two millions and a half, amounting, it is estimated,

on the 30th of June, 1848, to $4,000,000, would be derived from that

source, and the loan required would be reduced by that amount. It is

estimated also that should Congress graduate and reduce the price of

such of the public lands as have been long in the market the additional

revenue derived from that source would be annually, for several years

to come, between half a million and a million dollars; and the loan

required may be reduced by that amount also. Should these measures be

adopted, the loan required would not probably exceed $18,000,000 or

$19,000,000, leaving in the Treasury a constant surplus of $4,000,000.

The loan proposed, it is estimated, will be sufficient to cover the

necessary expenditures both for the war and for all other purposes up

to the 30th of June, 1848, and an amount of this loan not exceeding

one-half may be required during the present fiscal year, and the greater

part of the remainder during the first half of the fiscal year

succeeding.

In order that timely notice may be given and proper measures taken to

effect the loan, or such portion of it as may be required, it is

important that the authority of Congress to make it be given at an early

period of your present session. It is suggested that the loan should be

contracted for a period of twenty years, with authority to purchase the

stock and pay it off at an earlier period at its market value out of any

surplus which may at any time be in the Treasury applicable to that

purpose. After the establishment of peace with Mexico, it is supposed

that a considerable surplus will exist, and that the debt may be

extinguished in a much shorter period than that for which it may be

contracted. The period of twenty years, as that for which the proposed

loan may be contracted, in preference to a shorter period, is suggested,

because all experience, both at home and abroad, has shown that loans

are effected upon much better terms upon long time than when they are

reimbursable at short dates.

Necessary as this measure is to sustain the honor and the interests of

the country engaged in a foreign war, it is not doubted but that

Congress will promptly authorize it.

The balance in the Treasury on the 1st July last exceeded $9,000,000,

notwithstanding considerable expenditures had been made for the war

during the months of May and June preceding. But for the war the whole

public debt could and would have been extinguished within a short

period; and it was a part of my settled policy to do so, and thus

relieve the people from its burden and place the Government in a

position which would enable it to reduce the public expenditures to that

economical standard which is most consistent with the general welfare

and the pure and wholesome progress of our institutions.

Among our just causes of complaint against Mexico arising out of her

refusal to treat for peace, as well before as since the war so unjustly

commenced on her part, are the extraordinary expenditures in which we

have been involved. Justice to our own people will make it proper that

Mexico should be held responsible for these expenditures.

Economy in the public expenditures is at all times a high duty which all

public functionaries of the Government owe to the people. This duty

becomes the more imperative in a period of war, when large and

extraordinary expenditures become unavoidable. During the existence of

the war with Mexico all our resources should be husbanded, and no

appropriations made except such as are absolutely necessary for its

vigorous prosecution and the due administration of the Government.

Objects of appropriation which in peace may be deemed useful or proper,

but which are not indispensable for the public service, may when the

country is engaged in a foreign war be well postponed to a future

period. By the observance of this policy at your present session large

amounts may be saved to the Treasury and be applied to objects of

pressing and urgent necessity, and thus the creation of a corresponding

amount of public debt may be avoided.

It is not meant to recommend that the ordinary and necessary

appropriations for the support of Government should be withheld; but it

is well known that at every session of Congress appropriations are

proposed for numerous objects which may or may not be made without

materially affecting the public interests, and these it is recommended

should not be granted.

The act passed at your last session "reducing the duties on imports" not

having gone into operation until the 1st of the present month, there has

not been time for its practical effect upon the revenue and the business

of the country to be developed. It is not doubted, however, that the

just policy which it adopts will add largely to our foreign trade and

promote the general prosperity. Although it can not be certainly

foreseen what amount of revenue it will yield, it is estimated that it

will exceed that produced by the act of 1842, which it superseded. The

leading principles established by it are to levy the taxes with a view

to raise revenue and to impose them upon the articles imported according

to their actual value.

The act of 1842, by the excessive rates of duty which it imposed on many

articles, either totally excluded them from importation or greatly

reduced the amount imported, and thus diminished instead of producing

revenue. By it the taxes were imposed not for the legitimate purpose of

raising revenue, but to afford advantages to favored classes at the

expense of a large majority of their fellow-citizens. Those employed in

agriculture, mechanical pursuits, commerce, and navigation were

compelled to contribute from their substance to swell the profits and

overgrown wealth of the comparatively few who had invested their capital

in manufactures. The taxes were not levied in proportion to the value of

the articles upon which they were imposed, but, widely departing from

this just rule, the lighter taxes were in many cases levied upon

articles of luxury and high price and the heavier taxes on those of

necessity and low price, consumed by the great mass of the people. It

was a system the inevitable effect of which was to relieve favored

classes and the wealthy few from contributing their just proportion for

the support of Government, and to lay the burden on the labor of the

many engaged in other pursuits than manufactures.

A system so unequal and unjust has been superseded by the existing

law, which imposes duties not for the benefit or injury of classes or

pursuits, but distributes and, as far as practicable, equalizes the

public burdens among all classes and occupations. The favored classes

who under the unequal and unjust system which has been repealed have

heretofore realized large profits, and many of them amassed large

fortunes at the expense of the many who have been made tributary to

them, will have no reason to complain if they shall be required to

bear their just proportion of the taxes necessary for the support of

Government. So far from it, it will be perceived by an examination of

the existing law that discriminations in the rates of duty imposed

within the revenue principle have been retained in their favor. The

incidental aid against foreign competition which they still enjoy gives

them an advantage which no other pursuits possess, but of this none

others will complain, because the duties levied are necessary for

revenue. These revenue duties, including freights and charges, which

the importer must pay before he can come in competition with the home

manufacturer in our markets, amount on nearly all our leading branches

of manufacture to more than one-third of the value of the imported

article, and in some cases to almost one-half its value. With such

advantages it is not doubted that our domestic manufacturers will

continue to prosper, realizing in well-conducted establishments even

greater profits than can be derived from any other regular business.

Indeed, so far from requiring the protection of even incidental revenue

duties, our manufacturers in several leading branches are extending

their business, giving evidence of great ingenuity and skill and of

their ability to compete, with increased prospect of success, for the

open market of the world. Domestic manufactures to the value of several

millions of dollars, which can not find a market at home, are annually

exported to foreign countries. With such rates of duty as those

established by the existing law the system will probably be permanent,

and capitalists who are made or shall hereafter make their investments

in manufactures will know upon what to rely. The country will be

satisfied with these rates, because the advantages which the

manufacturers still enjoy result necessarily from the collection of

revenue for the support of Government. High protective duties, from

their unjust operation upon the masses of the people, can not fail to

give rise to extensive dissatisfaction and complaint and to constant

efforts to change or repeal them, rendering all investments in

manufactures uncertain and precarious. Lower and more permanent rates of

duty, at the same time that they will yield to the manufacturer fair and

remunerating profits, will secure him against the danger of frequent

changes in the system, which can not fail to ruinously affect his

interests.

Simultaneously with the relaxation of the restrictive policy by the

United States, Great Britain, from whose example we derived the system,

has relaxed hers. She has modified her corn laws and reduced many other

duties to moderate revenue rates. After ages of experience the statesmen

of that country have been constrained by a stern necessity and by a

public opinion having its deep foundation in the sufferings and wants of

impoverished millions to abandon a system the effect of which was to

build up immense fortunes in the hands of the few and to reduce the

laboring millions to pauperism and misery. Nearly in the same ratio that

labor was depressed capital was increased and concentrated by the

British protective policy.

The evils of the system in Great Britain were at length rendered

intolerable, and it has been abandoned, but not without a severe

struggle on the part of the protected and favored classes to retain the

unjust advantages which they have so long enjoyed. It was to be expected

that a similar struggle would be made by the same classes in the United

States whenever an attempt was made to modify or abolish the same unjust

system here. The protective policy had been in operation in the United

States for a much shorter period, and its pernicious effects were not,

therefore, so clearly perceived and felt. Enough, however, was known of

these effects to induce its repeal.

It would be strange if in the face of the example of _Great Britain_,

our principal foreign customer, and of the evils of a system rendered

manifest in that country by long and painful experience, and in the face

of the immense advantages which under a more liberal commercial policy

we are already deriving, and must continue to derive, by supplying her

starving population with food, the United States should restore a policy

which she has been compelled to abandon, and thus diminish her ability

to purchase from us the food and other articles which she so much needs

and we so much desire to sell. By the simultaneous abandonment of the

protective policy by Great Britain and the United States new and

important markets have already been opened for our agricultural and

other products, commerce and navigation have received a new impulse,

labor and trade have been released from the artificial trammels which

have so long fettered them, and to a great extent reciprocity in the

exchange of commodities has been introduced at the same time by both

countries, and greatly for the benefit of both. Great Britain has been

forced by the pressure of circumstances at home to abandon a policy

which has been upheld for ages, and to open her markets for our immense

surplus of breadstuffs, and it is confidently believed that other powers

of Europe will ultimately see the wisdom, if they be not compelled by

the pauperism and sufferings of their crowded population, to pursue a

similar policy.

Our farmers are more deeply interested in maintaining the just and

liberal policy of the existing law than any other class of our citizens.

They constitute a large majority of our population, and it is well known

that when they prosper all other pursuits prosper also. They have

heretofore not only received none of the bounties or favors of

Government, but by the unequal operations of the protective policy have

been made by the burdens of taxation which it imposed to contribute to

the bounties which have enriched others.

When a foreign as well as a home market is opened to them, they must

receive, as they are now receiving, increased prices for their products.

They will find a readier sale, and at better prices, for their wheat,

flour, rice, Indian corn, beef, pork, lard, butter, cheese, and other

articles which they produce. The home market alone is inadequate to

enable them to dispose of the immense surplus of food and other articles

which they are capable of producing, even at the most reduced prices,

for the manifest reason that they can not be consumed in the country.

The United States can from their immense surplus supply not only the

home demand, but the deficiencies of food required by the whole world.

That the reduced production of some of the chief articles of food in

Great Britain and other parts of Europe may have contributed to increase

the demand for our breadstuffs and provisions is not doubted, but that

the great and efficient cause of this increased demand and of increased

prices consists in the removal of artificial restrictions heretofore

imposed is deemed to be equally certain. That our exports of food,

already increased and increasing beyond former example under the more

liberal policy which has been adopted, will be still vastly enlarged

unless they be checked or prevented by a restoration of the protective

policy can not be doubted. That our commercial and navigating interests

will be enlarged in a corresponding ratio with the increase of our trade

is equally certain, while our manufacturing interests will still be the

favored interests of the country and receive the incidental protection

afforded them by revenue duties; and more than this they can not justly

demand.

In my annual message of December last a tariff of revenue duties based

upon the principles of the existing law was recommended, and I have seen

no reason to change the opinions then expressed. In view of the probable

beneficial effects of that law, I recommend that the policy established

by it be maintained. It has but just commenced to operate, and to

abandon or modify it without giving it a fair trial would be inexpedient

and unwise. Should defects in any of its details be ascertained by

actual experience to exist, these may be hereafter corrected; but until

such defects shall become manifest the act should be fairly tested.

It is submitted for your consideration whether it may not be proper, as

a war measure, to impose revenue duties on some of the articles now

embraced in the free list. Should it be deemed proper to impose such

duties with a view to raise revenue to meet the expenses of the war with

Mexico or to avoid to that extent the creation of a public debt, they

may be repealed when the emergency which gave rise to them shall cease

to exist, and constitute no part of the permanent policy of the country.

The act of the 6th of August last, "to provide for the better

organization of the Treasury and for the collection, safe-keeping,

transfer, and disbursement of the public revenue," has been carried into

execution as rapidly as the delay necessarily arising out of the

appointment of new officers, taking and approving their bonds, and

preparing and securing proper places for the safe-keeping of the public

money would permit. It is not proposed to depart in any respect from the

principles or policy on which this great measure is founded. There are,

however, defects in the details of the measure, developed by its

practical operation, which are fully set forth in the report of the

Secretary of the Treasury, to which the attention of Congress is

invited. These defects would impair to some extent the successful

operation of the law at all times, but are especially embarrassing when

the country is engaged in a war, when the expenditures are greatly

increased, when loans are to be effected and the disbursements are to be

made at points many hundred miles distant, in some cases, from any

depository, and a large portion of them in a foreign country. The

modifications suggested in the report of the Secretary of the Treasury

are recommended to your favorable consideration.

In connection with this subject I invite your attention to the

importance of establishing a branch of the Mint of the United States at

New York. Two-thirds of the revenue derived from customs being collected

at that point, the demand for specie to pay the duties will be large,

and a branch mint where foreign coin and bullion could be immediately

converted into American coin would greatly facilitate the transaction of

the public business, enlarge the circulation of gold and silver, and be

at the same time a safe depository of the public money.

The importance of graduating and reducing the price of such of the

public lands as have been long offered in the market at the minimum rate

authorized by existing laws, and remain unsold, induces me again to

recommend the subject to your favorable consideration. Many millions of

acres of these lands have been offered in the market for more than

thirty years and larger quantities for more than ten or twenty years,

and, being of an inferior quality, they must remain unsalable for an

indefinite period unless the price at which they may be purchased shall

be reduced. To place a price upon them above their real value is not

only to prevent their sale, and thereby deprive the Treasury of any

income from that source, but is unjust to the States in which they lie,

because it retards their growth and increase of population, and because

they have no power to levy a tax upon them as upon other lands within

their limits, held by other proprietors than the United States, for the

support of their local governments.

The beneficial effects of the graduation principle have been realized by

some of the States owning the lands within their limits in which it has

been adopted. They have been demonstrated also by the United States

acting as the trustee of the Chickasaw tribe of Indians in the sale of

their lands lying within the States of Mississippi and Alabama. The

Chickasaw lands, which would not command in the market the minimum price

established by the laws of the United States for the sale of their

lands, were, in pursuance of the treaty of 1834 with that tribe,

subsequently offered for sale at graduated and reduced rates for limited

periods. The result was that large quantities of these lands were

purchased which would otherwise have remained unsold. The lands were

disposed of at their real value, and many persons of limited means were

enabled to purchase small tracts, upon which they have settled with

their families. That similar results would be produced by the adoption

of the graduation policy by the United States in all the States in which

they are the owners of large bodies of lands which have been long in the

market can not be doubted. It can not be a sound policy to withhold

large quantities of the public lands from the use and occupation of our

citizens by fixing upon them prices which experience has shown they will

not command. On the contrary, it is a wise policy to afford facilities

to our citizens to become the owners at low and moderate rates of

freeholds of their own instead of being the tenants and dependents of

others. If it be apprehended that these lands if reduced in price would

be secured in large quantities by speculators or capitalists, the sales

may be restricted in limited quantities to actual settlers or persons

purchasing for purposes of cultivation.

In my last annual message I submitted for the consideration of Congress

the present system of managing the mineral lands of the United States,

and recommended that they should be brought into market and sold upon

such terms and under such restrictions as Congress might prescribe. By

the act of the 11th of July last "the reserved lead mines and contiguous

lands in the States of Illinois and Arkansas and Territories of

Wisconsin and Iowa" were authorized to be sold. The act is confined in

its operation to "lead mines and contiguous lands." A large portion of

the public lands, containing copper and other ores, is represented to be

very valuable, and I recommend that provision be made authorizing the

sale of these lands upon such terms and conditions as from their

supposed value may in the judgment of Congress be deemed advisable,

having due regard to the interests of such of our citizens as may be

located upon them.

It will be important during your present session to establish a

Territorial government and to extend the jurisdiction and laws of the

United States over the Territory of Oregon. Our laws regulating trade

and intercourse with the Indian tribes east of the Rocky Mountains

should be extended to the Pacific Ocean; and for the purpose of

executing them and preserving friendly relations with the Indian tribes

within our limits, an additional number of Indian agencies will be

required, and should be authorized by law. The establishment of

custom-houses and of post-offices and post-roads and provision for the

transportation of the mail on such routes as the public convenience will

suggest require legislative authority. It will be proper also to

establish a surveyor-general's office in that Territory and to make the

necessary provision for surveying the public lands and bringing them

into market. As our citizens who now reside in that distant region have

been subjected to many hardships, privations, and sacrifices in their

emigration, and by their improvements have enhanced the value of the

public lands in the neighborhood of their settlements, it is recommended

that liberal grants be made to them of such portions of these lands as

they may occupy, and that similar grants or rights of preemption be made

to all who may emigrate thither within a limited period, prescribed by

law.

The report of the Secretary of War contains detailed information

relative to the several branches of the public service connected with

that Department. The operations of the Army have been of a satisfactory

and highly gratifying character. I recommend to your early and favorable

consideration the measures proposed by the Secretary of War for speedily

filling up the rank and file of the Regular Army, for its greater

efficiency in the field, and for raising an additional force to serve

during the war with Mexico.

Embarrassment is likely to arise for want of legal provision authorizing

compensation to be made to the agents employed in the several States and

Territories to pay the Revolutionary and other pensioners the amounts

allowed them by law. Your attention is invited to the recommendations

of the Secretary of War on this subject. These agents incur heavy

responsibilities and perform important duties, and no reason exists why

they should not be placed on the same footing as to compensation with

other disbursing officers.

Our relations with the various Indian tribes continue to be of a pacific

character. The unhappy dissensions which have existed among the

Cherokees for many years past have been healed. Since my last annual

message important treaties have been negotiated with some of the tribes,

by which the Indian title to large tracts of valuable land within the

limits of the States and Territories has been extinguished and

arrangements made for removing them to the country west of the

Mississippi. Between 3,000 and 4,000 of different tribes have been

removed to the country provided for them by treaty stipulations, and

arrangements have been made for others to follow.

In our intercourse with the several tribes particular attention has been

given to the important subject of education. The number of schools

established among them has been increased, and additional means provided

not only for teaching them the rudiments of education, but of

instructing them in agriculture and the mechanic arts.

I refer you to the report of the Secretary of the Navy for a

satisfactory view of the operations of the Department under his charge

during the past year. It is gratifying to perceive that while the war

with Mexico has rendered it necessary to employ an unusual number of our

armed vessels on her coasts, the protection due to our commerce in other

quarters of the world has not proved insufficient. No means will be

spared to give efficiency to the naval service in the prosecution of the

war; and I am happy to know that the officers and men anxiously desire

to devote themselves to the service of their country in any enterprise,

however difficult of execution.

I recommend to your favorable consideration the proposition to add to

each of our foreign squadrons an efficient sea steamer, and, as

especially demanding attention, the establishment at Pensacola of the

necessary means of repairing and refitting the vessels of the Navy

employed in the Gulf of Mexico.

There are other suggestions in the report which deserve and I doubt not

will receive your consideration.

The progress and condition of the mail service for the past year are

fully presented in the report of the Postmaster-General. The revenue for

the year ending on the 30th of June last amounted to $3,487,199, which

is $802,642.45 less than that of the preceding year. The payments for

that Department during the same time amounted to $4,084,297.22. Of this

sum $597,097.80 have been drawn from the Treasury. The disbursements for

the year were $236,434.77 less than those of the preceding year. While

the disbursements have been thus diminished, the mail facilities have

been enlarged by new mail routes of 5,739 miles, an increase of

transportation of 1,764,145 miles, and the establishment of 418 new

post-offices. Contractors, postmasters, and others engaged in this

branch of the service have performed their duties with energy and

faithfulness deserving commendation. For many interesting details

connected with the operations of this establishment you are referred to

the report of the Postmaster-General, and his suggestions for improving

its revenues are recommended to your favorable consideration. I repeat

the opinion expressed in my last annual message that the business of

this Department should be so regulated chat the revenues derived from it

should be made to equal the expenditures, and it is believed that this

may be done by proper modifications of the present laws, as suggested in

the report of the Postmaster-General, without changing the present rates

of postage.

With full reliance upon the wisdom and patriotism of your deliberations,

it, will be my duty, as it will be my anxious desire, to cooperate with

you in every constitutional effort to promote the welfare and maintain

the honor of our common country.

A Compilation of the Messages and Papers of the Presidents. Volume 4, part 3: James Knox Polk · 第 119 / 289 题