Recent events have emphasized the importance of an early and exhaustive

consideration of this question, to see whether it is not possible to

furnish better safeguards than the several States have been able to

furnish against corruption of the flagrant kind which has been exposed.

It has been only too clearly shown that certain of the men at the head

of these large corporations take but small note of the ethical

distinction between honesty and dishonesty; they draw the line only

this side of what may be called law-honesty, the kind of honesty

necessary in order to avoid falling into the clutches of the law. Of

course the only complete remedy for this condition must be found in an

aroused public conscience, a higher sense of ethical conduct in the

community at large, and especially among business men and in the great

profession of the law, and in the growth of a spirit which condemns all

dishonesty, whether in rich man or in poor man, whether it takes the

shape of bribery or of blackmail. But much can be done by legislation

which is not only drastic but practical. There is need of a far

stricter and more uniform regulation of the vast insurance interests of

this country. The United States should in this respect follow the

policy of other nations by providing adequate national supervision of

commercial interests which are clearly national in character. My

predecessors have repeatedly recognized that the foreign business of

these companies is an important part of our foreign commercial

relations. During the administrations of Presidents Cleveland,

Harrison, and McKinley the State Department exercised its influence,

through diplomatic channels, to prevent unjust discrimination by

foreign countries against American insurance companies. These

negotiations illustrated the propriety of the Congress recognizing the

National character of insurance, for in the absence of Federal

legislation the State Department could only give expression to the

wishes of the authorities of the several States, whose policy was

ineffective through want of uniformity.

I repeat my previous recommendation that the Congress should also

consider whether the Federal Government has any power or owes any duty

with respect to domestic transactions in insurance of an interstate

character. That State supervision has proved inadequate is generally

conceded. The burden upon insurance companies, and therefore their

policy holders, of conflicting regulations of many States, is

unquestioned, while but little effective check is imposed upon any able

and unscrupulous man who desires to exploit the company in his own

interest at the expense of the policy holders and of the public. The

inability of a State to regulate effectively insurance corporations

created under the laws of other States and transacting the larger part

of their business elsewhere is also clear. As a remedy for this evil of

conflicting, ineffective, and yet burdensome regulations there has been

for many years a widespread demand for Federal supervision. The

Congress has already recognized that interstate insurance may be a

proper subject for Federal legislation, for in creating the Bureau of

Corporations it authorized it to publish and supply useful information

concerning interstate corporations, "including corporations engaged in

insurance." It is obvious that if the compilation of statistics be the

limit of the Federal power it is wholly ineffective to regulate this

form of commercial intercourse between the States, and as the insurance

business has outgrown in magnitude the possibility of adequate State

supervision, the Congress should carefully consider whether further

legislation can be bad. What is said above applies with equal force to

fraternal and benevolent organizations which contract for life

insurance.

There is more need of stability than of the attempt to attain an ideal

perfection in the methods of raising revenue; and the shock and strain

to the business world certain to attend any serious change in these

methods render such change inadvisable unless for grave reason. It is

not possible to lay down any general rule by which to determine the

moment when the reasons for will outweigh the reasons against such a

change. Much must depend, not merely on the needs, but on the desires,

of the people as a whole; for needs and desires are not necessarily

identical. Of course, no change can be made on lines beneficial to, or

desired by, one section or one State only. There must be something like

a general agreement among the citizens of the several States, as

represented in the Congress, that the change is needed and desired in

the interest of the people, as a whole; and there should then be a

sincere, intelligent, and disinterested effort to make it in such shape

as will combine, so far as possible, the maximum of good to the people

at large with the minimum of necessary disregard for the special

interests of localities or classes. But in time of peace the revenue

must on the average, taking a series of years together, equal the

expenditures or else the revenues must be increased. Last year there

was a deficit. Unless our expenditures can be kept within the revenues

then our revenue laws must be readjusted. It is as yet too early to

attempt to outline what shape such a readjustment should take, for it

is as yet too early to say whether there will be need for it. It should

be considered whether it is not desirable that the tariff laws should

provide for applying as against or in favor of any other nation maximum

and minimum tariff rates established by the Congress, so as to secure a

certain reciprocity of treatment between other nations and ourselves.

Having in view even larger considerations of policy than those of a

purely economic nature, it would, in my judgment, be well to endeavor

to bring about closer commercial connections with the other peoples of

this continent. I am happy to be able to announce to you that Russia

now treats us on the most-favored-nation basis.

I earnestly recommend to Congress the need of economy and to this end

of a rigid scrutiny of appropriations. As examples merely, I call your

attention to one or two specific matters. All unnecessary offices

should be abolished. The Commissioner of the General Land Office

recommends the abolishment of the office of Receiver of Public Moneys

for the United States Land Office. This will effect a saving of about a

quarter of a million dollars a year. As the business of the Nation

grows, it is inevitable that there should be from time to time a

legitimate increase in the number of officials, and this fact renders

it all the more important that when offices become unnecessary they

should be abolished. In the public printing also a large saving of

public money can be made. There is a constantly growing tendency to

publish masses of unimportant information. It is probably not unfair to

say that many tens of thousands of volumes are published at which no

human being ever looks and for which there is no real demand whatever.

Yet, in speaking of economy, I must in no wise be understood as

advocating the false economy which is in the end the worst

extravagance. To cut down on the navy, for instance, would be a crime

against the Nation. To fail to push forward all work on the Panama

Canal would be as great a folly.

In my message of December 2, 1902, to the Congress I said:

"Interest rates are a potent factor in business activity, and in order

that these rates may be equalized to meet the varying needs of the

seasons and of widely separated communities, and to prevent the

recurrence of financial stringencies, which injuriously affect

legitimate business, it is necessary that there should be an element of

elasticity in our monetary system. Banks are the natural servants of

commerce, and, upon them should be placed, as far as practicable, the

burden of furnishing and maintaining a circulation adequate to supply

the needs of our diversified industries and of our domestic and foreign

commerce; and the issue of this should be so regulated that a

sufficient supply should be always available for the business interests

of the country."

Every consideration of prudence demands the addition of the element of

elasticity to our currency system. The evil does not consist in an

inadequate volume of money, but in the rigidity of this volume, which

does not respond as it should to the varying needs of communities and

of seasons. Inflation must be avoided; but some provision should be

made that will insure a larger volume of money during the Fall and

Winter months than in the less active seasons of the year; so that the

currency will contract against speculation, and will expand for the

needs of legitimate business. At present the Treasury Department is at

irregularly recurring intervals obliged, in the interest of the

business world--that is, in the interests of the American public--to

try to avert financial crises by providing a remedy which should be

provided by Congressional action.

At various times I have instituted investigations into the organization

and conduct of the business of the executive departments. While none of

these inquiries have yet progressed far enough to warrant final

conclusions, they have already confirmed and emphasized the general

impression that the organization of the departments is often faulty in

principle and wasteful in results, while many of their business methods

are antiquated and inefficient. There is every reason why our executive

governmental machinery should be at least as well planned, economical,

and efficient as the best machinery of the great business

organizations, which at present is not the case. To make it so is a

task of complex detail and essentially executive in its nature;

probably no legislative body, no matter how wise and able, could

undertake it with reasonable prospect of success. I recommend that the

Congress consider this subject with a view to provide by legislation

for the transfer, distribution, consolidation, and assignment of duties

and executive organizations or parts of organizations, and for the

changes in business methods, within or between the several departments,

that will best promote the economy, efficiency, and high character of

the Government work.

In my last annual message I said:

"The power of the Government to protect the integrity of the elections

of its own officials is inherent and has been recognized and affirmed

by repeated declarations of the Supreme Court. There is no enemy of

free government more dangerous and none so insidious as the corruption

of the electorate. No one defends or excuses corruption, and it would

seem to follow that none would oppose vigorous measures to eradicate

it. I recommend the enactment of a law directed against bribery and

corruption in Federal elections. The details of such a law may be

safely left to the wise discretion of the Congress, but it should go as

far as under the Constitution it is possible to go, and should include

severe penalties against him who gives or receives a bribe intended to

influence his act or opinion as an elector; and provisions for the

publication not only of the expenditures for nominations and elections

of all candidates, but also of all contributions received and

expenditures made by political committees."

I desire to repeat this recommendation. In political campaigns in a

country as large and populous as ours it is inevitable that there

should be much expense of an entirely legitimate kind. This, of course,

means that many contributions, and some of them of large size, must be

made, and, as a matter of fact, in any big political contest such

contributions are always made to both sides. It is entirely proper both

to give and receive them, unless there is an improper motive connected

with either gift or reception. If they are extorted by any kind of

pressure or promise, express or implied, direct or indirect, in the way

of favor or immunity, then the giving or receiving becomes not only

improper but criminal. It will undoubtedly be difficult, as a matter of

practical detail, to shape an act which shall guard with reasonable

certainty against such misconduct; but if it is possible to secure by

law the full and verified publication in detail of all the sums

contributed to and expended by the candidates or committees of any

political parties, the result cannot but be wholesome. All

contributions by corporations to any political committee or for any

political purpose should be forbidden by law; directors should not be

permitted to use stockholders' money for such purposes; and, moreover,

a prohibition of this kind would be, as far as it went, an effective

method of stopping the evils aimed at in corrupt practices acts. Not

only should both the National and the several State Legislatures forbid

any officer of a corporation from using the money of the corporation in

or about any election, but they should also forbid such use of money in

connection with any legislation save by the employment of counsel in

public manner for distinctly legal services.

The first conference of nations held at The Hague in 1899, being unable

to dispose of all the business before it, recommended the consideration

and settlement of a number of important questions by another conference

to be called subsequently and at an early date. These questions were

the following: (1) The rights and duties of neutrals; (2) the

limitation of the armed forces on land and sea, and of military

budgets; (3) the use of new types and calibres of military and naval

guns; (4) the inviolability of private property at sea in times of war;

(5) the bombardment of ports, cities, and villages by naval forces. In

October, 1904, at the instance of the Interparliamentary Union, which,

at a conference held in the United States, and attended by the

lawmakers of fifteen different nations, had reiterated the demand for a

second conference of nations, I issued invitations to all the powers

signatory to The Hague Convention to send delegates to such a

conference, and suggested that it be again held at The Hague. In its

note of December 16, 1904, the United States Government communicated to

the representatives of foreign governments its belief that the

conference could be best arranged under the provisions of the present

Hague treaty.

From all the powers acceptance was received, coupled in some cases with

the condition that we should wait until the end of the war then waging

between Russia and Japan. The Emperor of Russia, immediately after the

treaty of peace which so happily terminated this war, in a note

presented to the President on September 13, through Ambassador Rosen,

took the initiative in recommending that the conference be now called.

The United States Government in response expressed its cordial

acquiescence, and stated that it would, as a matter of course, take

part in the new conference and endeavor to further its aims. We assume

that all civilized governments will support the movement, and that the

conference is now an assured fact. This Government will do everything

in its power to secure the success of the conference, to the end that

substantial progress may be made in the cause of international peace,

justice, and good will.

This renders it proper at this time to say something as to the general

attitude of this Government toward peace. More and more war is coming

to be looked upon as in itself a lamentable and evil thing. A wanton or

useless war, or a war of mere aggression--in short, any war begun or

carried on in a conscienceless spirit, is to be condemned as a

peculiarly atrocious crime against all humanity. We can, however, do

nothing of permanent value for peace unless we keep ever clearly in

mind the ethical element which lies at the root of the problem. Our aim

is righteousness. Peace is normally the hand-maiden of rightousness;

but when peace and righteousness conflict then a great and upright

people can never for a moment hesitate to follow the path which leads

toward righteousness, even though that path also leads to war. There

are persons who advocate peace at any price; there are others who,

following a false analogy, think that because it is no longer necessary

in civilized countries for individuals to protect their rights with a

strong hand, it is therefore unnecessary for nations to be ready to

defend their rights. These persons would do irreparable harm to any

nation that adopted their principles, and even as it is they seriously

hamper the cause which they advocate by tending to render it absurd in

the eyes of sensible and patriotic men. There can be no worse foe of

mankind in general, and of his own country in particular, than the

demagogue of war, the man who in mere folly or to serve his own selfish

ends continually rails at and abuses other nations, who seeks to excite

his countrymen against foreigners on insufficient pretexts, who excites

and inflames a perverse and aggressive national vanity, and who may on

occasions wantonly bring on conflict between his nation and some other

nation. But there are demagogues of peace just as there are demagogues

of war, and in any such movement as this for The Hague conference it is

essential not to be misled by one set of extremists any more than by

the other. Whenever it is possible for a nation or an individual to

work for real peace, assuredly it is failure of duty not so to strive,

but if war is necessary and righteous then either the man or the nation

shrinking from it forfeits all title to self-respect. We have scant

sympathy with the sentimentalist who dreads oppression less than

physical suffering, who would prefer a shameful peace to the pain and

toil sometimes lamentably necessary in order to secure a righteous

peace. As yet there is only a partial and imperfect analogy between

international law and internal or municipal law, because there is no

sanction of force for executing the former while there is in the case

of the latter. The private citizen is protected in his rights by the

law, because the law rests in the last resort upon force exercised

through the forms of law. A man does not have to defend his rights with

his own hand, because he can call upon the police, upon the sheriff's

posse, upon the militia, or in certain extreme cases upon the army, to

defend him. But there is no such sanction of force for international

law. At present there could be no greater calamity than for the free

peoples, the enlightened, independent, and peace-loving peoples, to

disarm while yet leaving it open to any barbarism or despotism to

remain armed. So long as the world is as unorganized as now the armies

and navies of those peoples who on the whole stand for justice, offer

not only the best, but the only possible, security for a just peace.

For instance, if the United States alone, or in company only with the

other nations that on the whole tend to act justly, disarmed, we might

sometimes avoid bloodshed, but we would cease to be of weight in

securing the peace of justice--the real peace for which the most

law-abiding and high-minded men must at times be willing to fight. As

the world is now, only that nation is equipped for peace that knows how

to fight, and that will not shrink from fighting if ever the conditions

become such that war is demanded in the name of the highest morality.

So much it is emphatically necessary to say in order both that the

position of the United States may not be misunderstood, and that a

genuine effort to bring nearer the day of the peace of justice among

the nations may not be hampered by a folly which, in striving to

achieve the impossible, would render it hopeless to attempt the

achievement of the practical. But, while recognizing most clearly all

above set forth, it remains our clear duty to strive in every

practicable way to bring nearer the time when the sword shall not be

the arbiter among nations. At present the practical thing to do is to

try to minimize the number of cases in which it must be the arbiter,

and to offer, at least to all civilized powers, some substitute for war

which will be available in at least a considerable number of instances.

Very much can be done through another Hague conference in this

direction, and I most earnestly urge that this Nation do all in its

power to try to further the movement and to make the result of the

decisions of The Hague conference effective. I earnestly hope that the

conference may be able to devise some way to make arbitration between

nations the customary way of settling international disputes in all

save a few classes of cases, which should themselves be as sharply

defined and rigidly limited as the present governmental and social

development of the world will permit. If possible, there should be a

general arbitration treaty negotiated among all the nations represented

at the conference. Neutral rights and property should be protected at

sea as they are protected on land. There should be an international

agreement to this purpose and a similar agreement defining contraband

of war.

During the last century there has been a distinct diminution in the

number of wars between the most civilized nations. International

relations have become closer and the development of The Hague tribunal

is not only a symptom of this growing closeness of relationship, but is

a means by which the growth can be furthered. Our aim should be from

time to time to take such steps as may be possible toward creating

something like an organization of the civilized nations, because as the

world becomes more highly organized the need for navies and armies will

diminish. It is not possible to secure anything like an immediate

disarmament, because it would first be necessary to settle what peoples

are on the whole a menace to the rest of mankind, and to provide

against the disarmament of the rest being turned into a movement which

would really chiefly benefit these obnoxious peoples; but it may be

possible to exercise some check upon the tendency to swell indefinitely

the budgets for military expenditure. Of course such an effort could

succeed only if it did not attempt to do too much; and if it were

undertaken in a spirit of sanity as far removed as possible from a

merely hysterical pseudo-philanthropy. It is worth while pointing out

that since the end of the insurrection in the Philippines this Nation

has shown its practical faith in the policy of disarmament by reducing

its little army one-third. But disarmament can never be of prime

importance; there is more need to get rid of the causes of war than of

the implements of war.

I have dwelt much on the dangers to be avoided by steering clear of any

mere foolish sentimentality because my wish for peace is so genuine and

earnest; because I have a real and great desire that this second Hague

conference may mark a long stride forward in the direction of securing

the peace of justice throughout the world. No object is better worthy

the attention of enlightened statesmanship than the establishment of a

surer method than now exists of securing justice as between nations,

both for the protection of the little nations and for the prevention of

war between the big nations. To this aim we should endeavor not only to

avert bloodshed, but, above all, effectively to strengthen the forces

of right. The Golden Rule should be, and as the world grows in morality

it will be, the guiding rule of conduct among nations as among

individuals; though the Golden Rule must not be construed, in fantastic

manner, as forbidding the exercise of the police power. This mighty and

free Republic should ever deal with all other States, great or small,

on a basis of high honor, respecting their rights as jealously as it

safeguards its own.

One of the most effective instruments for peace is the Monroe Doctrine

as it has been and is being gradually developed by this Nation and

accepted by other nations. No other policy could have been as efficient

in promoting peace in the Western Hemisphere and in giving to each

nation thereon the chance to develop along its own lines. If we had

refused to apply the doctrine to changing conditions it would now be

completely outworn, would not meet any of the needs of the present day,

and, indeed, would probably by this time have sunk into complete

oblivion. It is useful at home, and is meeting with recognition abroad

because we have adapted our application of it to meet the growing and

changing needs of the hemisphere. When we announce a policy such as the

Monroe Doctrine we thereby commit ourselves to the consequences of the

policy, and those consequences from time to time alter. It is out of

the question to claim a right and yet shirk the responsibility for its

exercise. Not only we, but all American republics who are benefited by

the existence of the doctrine, must recognize the obligations each

nation is under as regards foreign peoples no less than its duty to

insist upon its own rights.

That our rights and interests are deeply concerned in the maintenance

of the doctrine is so clear as hardly to need argument. This is

especially true in view of the construction of the Panama Canal. As a

mere matter of self-defense we must exercise a close watch over the

approaches to this canal; and this means that we must be thoroughly

alive to our interests in the Caribbean Sea.

There are certain essential points which must never be forgotten as

regards the Monroe Doctrine. In the first place we must as a Nation

make it evident that we do not intend to treat it in any shape or way

as an excuse for aggrandizement on our part at the expense of the

republics to the south. We must recognize the fact that in some South

American countries there has been much suspicion lest we should

interpret the Monroe Doctrine as in some way inimical to their

interests, and we must try to convince all the other nations of this

continent once and for all that no just and orderly Government has

anything to fear from us. There are certain republics to the south of

us which have already reached such a point of stability, order, and

prosperity that they themselves, though as yet hardly consciously, are

among the guarantors of this doctrine. These republics we now meet not

only on a basis of entire equality, but in a spirit of frank and

respectful friendship, which we hope is mutual. If all of the republics

to the south of us will only grow as those to which I allude have

already grown, all need for us to be the especial champions of the

doctrine will disappear, for no stable and growing American Republic

wishes to see some great non-American military power acquire territory

in its neighborhood. All that this country desires is that the other

republics on this continent shall be happy and prosperous; and they

cannot be happy and prosperous unless they maintain order within their

boundaries and behave with a just regard for their obligations toward

outsiders. It must be understood that under no circumstances will the

United States use the Monroe Doctrine as a cloak for territorial

aggression. We desire peace with all the world, but perhaps most of all

with the other peoples of the American Continent. There are, of course,

limits to the wrongs which any self-respecting nation can endure. It is

always possible that wrong actions toward this Nation, or toward

citizens of this Nation, in some State unable to keep order among its

own people, unable to secure justice from outsiders, and unwilling to

do justice to those outsiders who treat it well, may result in our

having to take action to protect our rights; but such action will not

be taken with a view to territorial aggression, and it will be taken at

all only with extreme reluctance and when it has become evident that

every other resource has been exhausted.

Moreover, we must make it evident that we do not intend to permit the

Monroe Doctrine to be used by any nation on this Continent as a shield

to protect it from the consequences of its own misdeeds against foreign

nations. If a republic to the south of us commits a tort against a

foreign nation, such as an outrage against a citizen of that nation,

then the Monroe Doctrine does not force us to interfere to prevent

punishment of the tort, save to see that the punishment does not assume

the form of territorial occupation in any shape. The case is more

difficult when it refers to a contractual obligation. Our own

Government has always refused to enforce such contractual obligations

on behalf, of its citizens by an appeal to arms. It is much to be

wished that all foreign governments would take the same view. But they

do not; and in consequence we are liable at any time to be brought face

to face with disagreeable alternatives. On the one hand, this country

would certainly decline to go to war to prevent a foreign government

from collecting a just debt; on the other hand, it is very inadvisable

to permit any foreign power to take possession, even temporarily, of

the custom houses of an American Republic in order to enforce the

payment of its obligations; for such temporary occupation might turn

into a permanent occupation. The only escape from these alternatives

may at any time be that we must ourselves undertake to bring about some

arrangement by which so much as possible of a just obligation shall be

paid. It is far better that this country should put through such an

arrangement, rather than allow any foreign country to undertake it. To

do so insures the defaulting republic from having to pay debt of an

improper character under duress, while it also insures honest creditors

of the republic from being passed by in the interest of dishonest or

grasping creditors. Moreover, for the United States to take such a

position offers the only possible way of insuring us against a clash

with some foreign power. The position is, therefore, in the interest of

peace as well as in the interest of justice. It is of benefit to our

people; it is of benefit to foreign peoples; and most of all it is

really of benefit to the people of the country concerned.

This brings me to what should be one of the fundamental objects of the

Monroe Doctrine. We must ourselves in good faith try to help upward

toward peace and order those of our sister republics which need such

help. Just as there has been a gradual growth of the ethical element in

the relations of one individual to another, so we are, even though

slowly, more and more coming to recognize the duty of bearing one

another's burdens, not only as among individuals, but also as among

nations.

Santo Domingo, in her turn, has now made an appeal to us to help her,

and not only every principle of wisdom but every generous instinct

within us bids us respond to the appeal. It is not of the slightest

consequence whether we grant the aid needed by Santo Domingo as an

incident to the wise development of the Monroe Doctrine or because we

regard the case of Santo Domingo as standing wholly by itself, and to

be treated as such, and not on general principles or with any reference

to the Monroe Doctrine. The important point is to give the needed aid,

and the case is certainly sufficiently peculiar to deserve to be judged

purely on its own merits. The conditions in Santo Domingo have for a

number of years grown from bad to worse until a year ago all society

was on the verge of dissolution. Fortunately, just at this time a ruler

sprang up in Santo Domingo, who, with his colleagues, saw the dangers

threatening their country and appealed to the friendship of the only

great and powerful neighbor who possessed the power, and as they hoped

also the will to help them. There was imminent danger of foreign

intervention. The previous rulers of Santo Domingo had recklessly

incurred debts, and owing to her internal disorders she had ceased to

be able to provide means of paying the debts. The patience of her

foreign creditors had become exhausted, and at least two foreign

nations were on the point of intervention, and were only prevented from

intervening by the unofficial assurance of this Government that it

would itself strive to help Santo Domingo in her hour of need. In the

case of one of these nations, only the actual opening of negotiations

to this end by our Government prevented the seizure of territory in

Santo Domingo by a European power. Of the debts incurred some were

just, while some were not of a character which really renders it

obligatory on or proper for Santo Domingo to pay them in full. But she

could not pay any of them unless some stability was assured her

Government and people.

Accordingly, the Executive Department of our Government negotiated a

treaty under which we are to try to help the Dominican people to

straighten out their finances. This treaty is pending before the

Senate. In the meantime a temporary arrangement has been made which

will last until the Senate has had time to take action upon the treaty.

Under this arrangement the Dominican Government has appointed Americans

to all the important positions in the customs service and they are

seeing to the honest collection of the revenues, turning over 45 per

cent. to the Government for running expenses and putting the other 55

per cent. into a safe depository for equitable division in case the

treaty shall be ratified, among the various creditors, whether European

or American.

The Custom Houses offer well-nigh the only sources of revenue in Santo

Domingo, and the different revolutions usually have as their real aim

the obtaining of these Custom Houses. The mere fact that the Collectors

of Customs are Americans, that they are performing their duties with

efficiency and honesty, and that the treaty is pending in the Senate

gives a certain moral power to the Government of Santo Domingo which it

has not had before. This has completely discouraged all revolutionary

movement, while it has already produced such an increase in the

revenues that the Government is actually getting more from the 45 per

cent. that the American Collectors turn over to it than it got formerly

when it took the entire revenue. It is enabling the poor, harassed

people of Santo Domingo once more to turn their attention to industry

and to be free from the cure of interminable revolutionary disturbance.

It offers to all bona-fide creditors, American and European, the only

really good chance to obtain that to which they are justly entitled,

while it in return gives to Santo Domingo the only opportunity of

defense against claims which it ought not to pay, for now if it meets

the views of the Senate we shall ourselves thoroughly examine all these

claims, whether American or foreign, and see that none that are

improper are paid. There is, of course, opposition to the treaty from

dishonest creditors, foreign and American, and from the professional

revolutionists of the island itself. We have already reason to believe

that some of the creditors who do not dare expose their claims to

honest scrutiny are endeavoring to stir up sedition in the island and

opposition to the treaty. In the meantime, I have exercised the

authority vested in me by the joint resolution of the Congress to

prevent the introduction of arms into the island for revolutionary

purposes.

Under the course taken, stability and order and all the benefits of

peace are at last coming to Santo Domingo, danger of foreign

intervention has been suspended, and there is at last a prospect that

all creditors will get justice, no more and no less. If the arrangement

is terminated by the failure of the treaty chaos will follow; and if

chaos follows, sooner or later this Government may be involved in

serious difficulties with foreign Governments over the island, or else

may be forced itself to intervene in the island in some unpleasant

fashion. Under the proposed treaty the independence of the island is

scrupulously respected, the danger of violation of the Monroe Doctrine

by the intervention of foreign powers vanishes, and the interference of

our Government is minimized, so that we shall only act in conjunction

with the Santo Domingo authorities to secure the proper administration

of the customs, and therefore to secure the payment of just debts and

to secure the Dominican Government against demands for unjust debts.

The proposed method will give the people of Santo Domingo the same

chance to move onward and upward which we have already given to the

people of Cuba. It will be doubly to our discredit as a Nation if we

fail to take advantage of this chance; for it will be of damage to

ourselves, and it will be of incalculable damage to Santo Domingo.

Every consideration of wise policy, and, above all, every consideration

of large generosity, bids us meet the request of Santo Domingo as we

are now trying to meet it.

We cannot consider the question of our foreign policy without at the

same time treating of the Army and the Navy. We now have a very small

army indeed, one well-nigh infinitesimal when compared With the army of

any other large nation. Of course the army we do have should be as

nearly perfect of its kind and for its size as is possible. I do not

believe that any army in the world has a better average of enlisted men

or a better type of junior officer; but the army should be trained to

act effectively in a mass. Provision should be made by sufficient

appropriations for manoeuvers of a practical kind, so that the troops

may learn how to take care of themselves under actual service

conditions; every march, for instance, being made with the soldier

loaded exactly as he would be in active campaign. The Generals and

Colonels would thereby have opportunity of handling regiments,

brigades, and divisions, and the commissary and medical departments

would be tested in the field. Provision should be made for the exercise

at least of a brigade and by preference of a division in marching and

embarking at some point on our coast and disembarking at some other

point and continuing its march. The number of posts in which the army

is kept in time of peace should be materially diminished and the posts

that are left made correspondingly larger. No local interests should be

allowed to stand in the way of assembling the greater part of the

troops which would at need form our field armies in stations of such

size as will permit the best training to be given to the personnel of

all grades, including the high officers and staff officers. To

accomplish this end we must have not company or regimental garrisons,

but brigade and division garrisons. Promotion by mere seniority can

never result in a thoroughly efficient corps of officers in the higher

ranks unless there accompanies it a vigorous weeding-out process. Such

a weeding-out process--that is, such a process of selection--is a chief

feature of the four years' course of the young officer at West Point.

There is no good reason why it should stop immediately upon his

graduation. While at West Point he is dropped unless he comes up to a

certain standard of excellence, and when he graduates he takes rank in

the army according to his rank of graduation. The results are good at

West Point; and there should be in the army itself something that will

achieve the same end. After a certain age has been reached the average

officer is unfit to do good work below a certain grade. Provision

should be made for the promotion of exceptionally meritorious men over

the heads of their comrades and for the retirement of all men who have

reached a given age without getting beyond a given rank; this age of

retirement of course changing from rank to rank. In both the army and

the navy there should be some principle of selection, that is, of

promotion for merit, and there should be a resolute effort to eliminate

the aged officers of reputable character who possess no special

efficiency.

There should be an increase in the coast artillery force, so that our

coast fortifications can be in some degree adequately manned. There is

special need for an increase and reorganization of the Medical

Department of the army. In both the army and navy there must be the

same thorough training for duty in the staff corps as in the fighting

line. Only by such training in advance can we be sure that in actual

war field operations and those at sea will be carried on successfully.

The importance of this was shown conclusively in the Spanish-American

and the Russo-Japanese wars. The work of the medical departments in the

Japanese army and navy is especially worthy of study. I renew my

recommendation of January 9, 1905, as to the Medical Department of the

army and call attention to the equal importance of the needs of the

staff corps of the navy. In the Medical Department of the navy the

first in importance is the reorganization of the Hospital Corps, on the

lines of the Gallinger bill, (S. 3,984, February 1, 1904), and the

reapportionment of the different grades of the medical officers to meet

service requirements. It seems advisable also that medical officers of

the army and navy should have similar rank and pay in their respective

grades, so that their duties can be carried on without friction when

they are brought together. The base hospitals of the navy should be put

in condition to meet modern requirements and hospital ships be

provided. Unless we now provide with ample forethought for the medical

needs of the army and navy appalling suffering of a preventable kind is

sure to occur if ever the country goes to war. It is not reasonable to

expect successful administration in time of war of a department which

lacks a third of the number of officers necessary to perform the

medical service in time of peace. We need men who are not merely

doctors; they must be trained in the administration of military medical

service.

Our navy must, relatively to the navies of other nations, always be of

greater size than our army. We have most wisely continued for a number

of years to build up our navy, and it has now reached a fairly high

standard of efficiency. This standard of efficiency must not only be

maintained, but increased. It does not seem to be necessary, however,

that the navy should--at least in the immediate future--be increased

beyond the present number of units. What is now clearly necessary is to

substitute efficient for inefficient units as the latter become worn

out or as it becomes apparent that they are useless. Probably the

result would be attained by adding a single battleship to our navy each

year, the superseded or outworn vessels being laid up or broken up as

they are thus replaced. The four single-turret monitors built

immediately after the close of the Spanish war, for instance, are

vessels which would be of but little use in the event of war. The money

spent upon them could have been more usefully spent in other ways. Thus

it would have been far better never to have built a single one of these

monitors and to have put the money into an ample supply of reserve

guns. Most of the smaller cruisers and gunboats, though they serve a

useful purpose so far as they are needed for international police work,

would not add to the strength of our navy in a conflict with a serious

foe. There is urgent need of providing a large increase in the number

of officers, and especially in the number of enlisted men.

Recent naval history has emphasized certain lessons which ought not to,

but which do, need emphasis. Seagoing torpedo boats or destroyers are

indispensable, not only for making night attacks by surprise upon an

enemy, but even in battle for finishing already crippled ships. Under

exceptional circumstances submarine boats would doubtless be of use.

Fast scouts are needed. The main strength of the navy, however, lies,

and can only lie, in the great battleships, the heavily armored,

heavily gunned vessels which decide the mastery of the seas.

Heavy-armed cruisers also play a most useful part, and unarmed

cruisers, if swift enough, are very useful as scouts. Between

antagonists of approximately equal prowess the comparative perfection

of the instruments of war will ordinarily determine the fight. But it

is, of course, true that the man behind the gun, the man in the engine

room, and the man in the conning tower, considered not only

individually, but especially with regard to the way in which they work

together, are even more important than the weapons with which they

work. The most formidable battleship is, of course, helpless against

even a light cruiser if the men aboard it are unable to hit anything

with their guns, and thoroughly well-handled cruisers may count

seriously in an engagement with much superior vessels, if the men

aboard the latter are ineffective, whether from lack of training or

from any other cause. Modern warships are most formidable mechanisms

when well handled, but they are utterly useless when not well handled,

and they cannot be handled at all without long and careful training.

This training can under no circumstance be given when once war has

broken out. No fighting ship of the first class should ever be laid up

save for necessary repairs, and her crew should be kept constantly

exercised on the high seas, so that she may stand at the highest point

of perfection. To put a new and untrained crew upon the most powerful

battleship and send it out to meet a formidable enemy is not only to

invite, but to insure, disaster and disgrace. To improvise crews at the

outbreak of a war, so far as the serious fighting craft are concerned,

is absolutely hopeless. If the officers and men are not thoroughly

skilled in, and have not been thoroughly trained to, their duties, it

would be far better to keep the ships in port during hostilities than

to send them against a formidable opponent, for the result could only

be that they would be either sunk or captured. The marksmanship of our

navy is now on the whole in a gratifying condition, and there has been

a great improvement in fleet practice. We need additional seamen; we

need a large store of reserve guns; we need sufficient money for ample

target practice, ample practice of every kind at sea. We should

substitute for comparatively inefficient types--the old third-class

battleship Texas, the single-turreted monitors above mentioned, and,

indeed, all the monitors and some of the old cruisers--efficient,

modern seagoing vessels. Seagoing torpedo-boat destroyers should be

substituted for some of the smaller torpedo boats. During the present

Congress there need be no additions to the aggregate number of units of

the navy. Our navy, though very small relatively to the navies of other

nations, is for the present sufficient in point of numbers for our

needs, and while we must constantly strive to make its efficiency

higher, there need be no additions to the total of ships now built and

building, save in the way of substitution as above outlined. I

recommend the report of the Secretary of the Navy to the careful

consideration of the Congress, especially with a view to the

legislation therein advocated.

During the past year evidence has accumulated to confirm the

expressions contained in my last two annual messages as to the

importance of revising by appropriate legislation our system of

naturalizing aliens. I appointed last March a commission to make a

careful examination of our naturalization laws, and to suggest

appropriate measures to avoid the notorious abuses resulting from the

improvident of unlawful granting of citizenship. This commission,

composed of an officer of the Department of State, of the Department of

Justice, and of the Department of Commerce and Labor, has discharged

the duty imposed upon it, and has submitted a report, which will be

transmitted to the Congress for its consideration, and, I hope, for its

favor, able action.

The distinguishing recommendations of the commission are:

First--A Federal Bureau of Naturalization, to be established in the

Department of Commerce and Labor, to supervise the administration of

the naturalization laws and to receive returns of naturalizations

pending and accomplished.

Second--Uniformity of naturalization certificates, fees to be charged,

and procedure.

Third--More exacting qualifications for citizenship.

Fourth--The preliminary declaration of intention to be abolished and no

alien to be naturalized until at least ninety days after the filing of

his petition.

Fifth--Jurisdiction to naturalize aliens to be confined to United

States district courts and to such State courts as have jurisdiction in

civil actions in which the amount in controversy is unlimited; in

cities of over 100,000 inhabitants the United States district courts to

have exclusive jurisdiction in the naturalization of the alien

residents of such cities.

In my last message I asked the attention of the Congress to the urgent

need of action to make our criminal law more effective; and I most

earnestly request that you pay heed to the report of the Attorney

General on this subject. Centuries ago it was especially needful to

throw every safeguard round the accused. The danger then was lest he

should be wronged by the State. The danger is now exactly the reverse.

Our laws and customs tell immensely in favor of the criminal and

against the interests of the public he has wronged. Some antiquated and

outworn rules which once safeguarded the threatened rights of private

citizens, now merely work harm to the general body politic. The

criminal law of the United States stands in urgent need of revision.

The criminal process of any court of the United States should run

throughout the entire territorial extent of our country. The delays of

the criminal law, no less than of the civil, now amount to a very great

evil.

There seems to be no statute of the United States which provides for

the punishment of a United States Attorney or other officer of the

Government who corruptly agrees to wrongfully do or wrongfully refrain

from doing any act when the consideration for such corrupt agreement is

other than one possessing money value. This ought to be remedied by

appropriate legislation. Legislation should also be enacted to cover

explicitly, unequivocally, and beyond question breach of trust in the

shape of prematurely divulging official secrets by an officer or

employe of the United States, and to provide a suitable penalty

therefor. Such officer or employe owes the duty to the United States to

guard carefully and not to divulge or in any manner use, prematurely,

information which is accessible to the officer or employe by reason of

his official position. Most breaches of public trust are already

covered by the law, and this one should be. It is impossible, no matter

how much care is used, to prevent the occasional appointment to the

public service of a man who when tempted proves unfaithful; but every

means should be provided to detect and every effort made to punish the

wrongdoer. So far as in my power see each and every such wrongdoer

shall be relentlessly hunted down; in no instance in the past has he

been spared; in no instance in the future shall he be spared. His crime

is a crime against every honest man in the Nation, for it is a crime

against the whole body politic. Yet in dwelling on such misdeeds it is

unjust not to add that they are altogether exceptional, and that on the

whole the employes of the Government render upright and faithful

service to the people. There are exceptions, notably in one or two

branches of the service, but at no time in the Nation's history has the

public service of the Nation taken as a whole stood on a higher plane

than now, alike as regards honesty and as regards efficiency.

Once again I call your attention to the condition of the public land

laws. Recent developments have given new urgency to the need for such

changes as will fit these laws to actual present conditions. The honest

disposal and right use of the remaining public lands is of fundamental

importance. The iniquitous methods by which the monopolizing of the

public lands is being brought about under the present laws are becoming

more generally known, but the existing laws do not furnish effective

remedies. The recommendations of the Public Lands Commission upon this

subject are wise and should be given effect.

The creation of small irrigated farms under the Reclamation act is a

powerful offset to the tendency of certain other laws to foster or

permit monopoly of the land. Under that act the construction of great

irrigation works has been proceeding rapidly and successfully, the

lands reclaimed are eagerly taken up, and the prospect that the policy

of National irrigation will accomplish all that was expected of it is

bright. The act should be extended to include the State of Texas.

The Reclamation act derives much of its value from the fact that it

tends to secure the greatest possible number of homes on the land, and

to create communities of freeholders, in part by settlement on public

lands, in part by forcing the subdivision of large private holdings

before they can get water from Government irrigation works. The law

requires that no right to the use of water for land in private

ownership shall be sold for a tract exceeding 160 acres to any one land

owner. This provision has excited active and powerful hostility, but

the success of the law itself depends on the wise and firm enforcement

of it. We cannot afford to substitute tenants for freeholders on the

public domain.

The greater part of the remaining public lands can not be irrigated.

They are at present and will probably always be of greater value for

grazing than for any other purpose. This fact has led to the grazing

homestead of 640 acres in Nebraska and to the proposed extension of it

to other States. It is argued that a family can not be supported on 160

acres of arid grazing land. This is obviously true, but neither can a

family be supported on 640 acres of much of the land to which it is

proposed to apply the grazing homestead. To establish universally any

such arbitrary limit would be unwise at the present time. It would

probably result on the one hand in enlarging the holdings of some of

the great land owners, and on the other in needless suffering and

failure on the part of a very considerable proportion of the bona fide

settlers who give faith to the implied assurance of the Government that

such an area is sufficient. The best use of the public grazing lands

requires the careful examination and classification of these lands in

order to give each settler land enough to support his family and no

more. While this work is being done, and until the lands are settled,

the Government should take control of the open range, under reasonable

regulations suited to local needs, following the general policy already

in successful operation on the forest reserves. It is probable that the

present grazing value of the open public range is scarcely more than

half what it once was or what it might easily be again under careful

regulation.

The forest policy of the Administration appears to enjoy the unbroken

support of the people. The great users of timber are themselves

forwarding the movement for forest preservation. All organized

opposition to the forest preserves in the West has disappeared. Since

the consolidation of all Government forest work in the National Forest

Service there has been a rapid and notable gain in the usefulness of

the forest reserves to the people and in public appreciation of their

value. The National parks within or adjacent to forest reserves should

be transferred to the charge of the Forest Service also.

The National Government already does something in connection with the

construction and maintenance of the great system of levees along the

lower course of the Mississippi; in my judgment it should do much more.

To the spread of our trade in peace and the defense of our flag in war

a great and prosperous merchant marine is indispensable. We should have

ships of our own and seamen of our own to convey our goods to neutral

markets, and in case of need to reinforce our battle line. It cannot

but be a source of regret and uneasiness to us that the lines of

communication with our sister republics of South America should be

chiefly under foreign control. It is not a good thing that American

merchants and manufacturers should have to send their goods and letters

to South America via Europe if they wish security and dispatch. Even on

the Pacific, where our ships have held their own better than on the

Atlantic, our merchant flag is now threatened through the liberal aid

bestowed by other Governments on their own steam lines. I ask your

earnest consideration of the report with which the Merchant Marine

Commission has followed its long and careful inquiry.

I again heartily commend to your favorable consideration the

tercentennial celebration at Jamestown, Va. Appreciating the

desirability of this commemoration, the Congress passed an act, March

3, 1905, authorizing in the year 1907, on and near the waters of

Hampton Roads, in the State of Virginia, an international naval,

marine, and military celebration in honor of this event. By the

authority vested in me by this act, I have made proclamation of said

celebration, and have issued, in conformity with its instructions,

invitations to all the nations of the earth to participate, by sending

their naval vessels and such military organizations as may be

practicable. This celebration would fail of its full purpose unless it

were enduring in its results and commensurate with the importance of

the event to be celebrated, the event from which our Nation dates its

birth. I earnestly hope that this celebration, already indorsed by the

Congress of the United States, and by the Legislatures of sixteen

States since the action of the Congress, will receive such additional

aid at your hands as will make it worthy of the great event it is

intended to celebrate, and thereby enable the Government of the United

States to make provision for the exhibition of its own resources, and

likewise enable our people who have undertaken the work of such a

celebration to provide suitable and proper entertainment and

instruction in the historic events of our country for all who may visit

the exposition and to whom we have tendered our hospitality.

It is a matter of unmixed satisfaction once more to call attention to

the excellent work of the Pension Bureau; for the veterans of the civil

war have a greater claim upon us than any other class of our citizens.

To them, first of all among our people, honor is due.

Seven years ago my lamented predecessor, President McKinley, stated

that the time had come for the Nation to care for the graves of the

Confederate dead. I recommend that the Congress take action toward this

end. The first need is to take charge of the graves of the Confederate

dead who died in Northern prisons.

The question of immigration is of vital interest to this country. In

the year ending June 30, 1905, there came to the United States

1,026,000 alien immigrants. In other words, in the single year that has

just elapsed there came to this country a greater number of people than

came here during the one hundred and sixty-nine years of our Colonial

life which intervened between the first landing at Jamestown and the

Declaration of Independence. It is clearly shown in the report of the

Commissioner General of Immigration that while much of this enormous

immigration is undoubtedly healthy and natural, a considerable

proportion is undesirable from one reason or another; moreover, a

considerable proportion of it, probably a very large proportion,

including most of the undesirable class, does not come here of its own

initiative, but because of the activity of the agents of the great

transportation companies. These agents are distributed throughout

Europe, and by the offer of all kinds of inducements they wheedle and

cajole many immigrants, often against their best interest, to come

here. The most serious obstacle we have to encounter in the effort to

secure a proper regulation of the immigration to these shores arises

from the determined opposition of the foreign steamship lines who have

no interest whatever in the matter save to increase the returns on

their capital by carrying masses of immigrants hither in the steerage

quarters of their ships.

As I said in my last message to the Congress, we cannot have too much

immigration of the right sort and we should have none whatever of the

wrong sort. Of course, it is desirable that even the right kind of

immigration should be properly distributed in this country. We need

more of such immigration for the South; and special effort should be

made to secure it. Perhaps it would be possible to limit the number of

immigrants allowed to come in any one year to New York and other

Northern cities, while leaving unlimited the number allowed to come to

the South; always provided, however, that a stricter effort is made to

see that only immigrants of the right kind come to our country

anywhere. In actual practice it has proved so difficult to enforce the

migration laws where long stretches of frontier marked by an imaginary

line alone intervene between us and our neighbors that I recommend that

no immigrants be allowed to come in from Canada and Mexico save natives

of the two countries themselves. As much as possible should be done to

distribute the immigrants upon the land and keep them away from the

contested tenement-house districts of the great cities. But

distribution is a palliative, not a cure. The prime need is to keep out

all immigrants who will not make good American citizens. The laws now

existing for the exclusion of undesirable immigrants should be

strengthened. Adequate means should be adopted, enforced by sufficient

penalties, to compel steamship companies engaged in the passenger

business to observe in good faith the law which forbids them to

encourage or solicit immigration to the United States. Moreover, there

should be a sharp limitation imposed upon all vessels coming to our

ports as to the number of immigrants in ratio to the tonnage which each

vessel can carry. This ratio should be high enough to insure the coming

hither of as good a class of aliens as possible. Provision should be

made for the surer punishment of those who induce aliens to come to

this country under promise or assurance of employment. It should be

made possible to inflict a sufficiently heavy penalty on any employer

violating this law to deter him from taking the risk. It seems to me

wise that there should be an international conference held to deal with

this question of immigration, which has more than a merely National

significance; such a conference could, among other things, enter at

length into the method for securing a thorough inspection of would-be

immigrants at the ports from which they desire to embark before

permitting them to embark.

In dealing with this question it is unwise to depart from the old

American tradition and to discriminate for or against any man who

desires to come here and become a citizen, save on the ground of that

man's fitness for citizenship. It is our right and duty to consider his

moral and social quality. His standard of living should be such that he

will not, by pressure of competition, lower the standard of living of

our own wage-workers; for it must ever be a prime object of our

legislation to keep high their standard of living. If the man who seeks

to come here is from the moral and social standpoint of such a

character as to bid fair to add value to the community he should be

heartily welcomed. We cannot afford to pay heed to whether he is of one

creed or another, of one nation, or another. We cannot afford to

consider whether he is Catholic or Protestant, Jew or Gentile; whether

he is Englishman or Irishman, Frenchman or German, Japanese, Italian,

Scandinavian, Slav, or Magyar. What we should desire to find out is the

individual quality of the individual man. In my judgment, with this end

in view, we shall have to prepare through our own agents a far more

rigid inspection in the countries from which the immigrants come. It

will be a great deal better to have fewer immigrants, but all of the

right kind, than a great number of immigrants, many of whom are

necessarily of the wrong kind. As far as possible we wish to limit the

immigration to this country to persons who propose to become citizens

of this country, and we can well afford to insist upon adequate

scrutiny of the character of those who are thus proposed for future

citizenship. There should be an increase in the stringency of the laws

to keep out insane, idiotic, epileptic, and pauper immigrants. But this

is by no means enough. Not merely the Anarchist, but every man of

Anarchistic tendencies, all violent and disorderly people, all people

of bad character, the incompetent, the lazy, the vicious, the

physically unfit, defective, or degenerate should be kept out. The

stocks out of which American citizenship is to be built should be

strong and healthy, sound in body, mind, and character. If it be

objected that the Government agents would not always select well, the

answer is that they would certainly select better than do the agents

and brokers of foreign steamship companies, the people who now do

whatever selection is done.

The questions arising in connection with Chinese immigration stand by

themselves. The conditions in China are such that the entire Chinese

coolie class, that is, the class of Chinese laborers, skilled and

unskilled, legitimately come under the head of undesirable immigrants

to this country, because of their numbers, the low wages for which they

work, and their low standard of living. Not only is it to the interest

of this country to keep them out, but the Chinese authorities do not

desire that they should be admitted. At present their entrance is

prohibited by laws amply adequate to accomplish this purpose. These

laws have been, are being, and will be, thoroughly enforced. The

violations of them are so few in number as to be infinitesimal and can

be entirely disregarded. This is no serious proposal to alter the

immigration law as regards the Chinese laborer, skilled or unskilled,

and there is no excuse for any man feeling or affecting to feel the

slightest alarm on the subject.

But in the effort to carry out the policy of excluding Chinese

laborers, Chinese coolies, grave injustice and wrong have been done by

this Nation to the people of China, and therefore ultimately to this

Nation itself. Chinese students, business and professional men of all

kinds--not only merchants, but bankers, doctors, manufacturers,

professors, travelers, and the like--should be encouraged to come here,

and treated on precisely the same footing that we treat students,

business men, travelers, and the like of other nations. Our laws and

treaties should be framed, not so as to put these people in the

excepted classes, but to state that we will admit all Chinese, except

Chinese of the coolie class, Chinese skilled or unskilled laborers.

There would not be the least danger that any such provision would

result in any relaxation of the law about laborers. These will, under

all conditions, be kept out absolutely. But it will be more easy to see

that both justice and courtesy are shown, as they ought to be shown, to

other Chinese, if the law or treaty is framed as above suggested.

Examinations should be completed at the port of departure from China.

For this purpose there should be provided a more adequate Consular

Service in China than we now have. The appropriations both for the

offices of the Consuls and for the office forces in the consulates

should be increased.

As a people we have talked much of the open door in China, and we

expect, and quite rightly intend to insist upon, justice being shown us

by the Chinese. But we cannot expect to receive equity unless we do

equity. We cannot ask the Chinese to do to us what we are unwilling to

do to them. They would have a perfect right to exclude our laboring men

if our laboring men threatened to come into their country in such

numbers as to jeopardize the well-being of the Chinese population; and

as, mutatis mutandis, these were the conditions with which Chinese

immigration actually brought this people face to face, we had and have

a perfect right, which the Chinese Government in no way contests, to

act as we have acted in the matter of restricting coolie immigration.

That this right exists for each country was explicitly acknowledged in

the last treaty between the two countries. But we must treat the

Chinese student, traveler, and business man in a spirit of the broadest

justice and courtesy if we expect similar treatment to be accorded to

our own people of similar rank who go to China. Much trouble has come

during the past Summer from the organized boycott against American

goods which has been started in China. The main factor in producing

this boycott has been the resentment felt by the students and business

people of China, by all the Chinese leaders, against the harshness of

our law toward educated Chinamen of the professional and business

classes. This Government has the friendliest feeling for China and

desires China's well-being. We cordially sympathize with the announced

purpose of Japan to stand for the integrity of China. Such an attitude

tends to the peace of the world.

The civil service law has been on the statute books for twenty-two

years. Every President and a vast majority of heads of departments who

have been in office during that period have favored a gradual extension

of the merit system. The more thoroughly its principles have been

understood, the greater has been the favor with which the law has been

regarded by administration officers. Any attempt to carry on the great

executive departments of the Government without this law would

inevitably result in chaos. The Civil Service Commissioners are doing

excellent work, and their compensation is inadequate considering the

service they perform.

The statement that the examinations are not practical in character is

based on a misapprehension of the practice of the Commission. The

departments are invariably consulted as to the requirements desired and

as to the character of questions that shall be asked. General

invitations are frequently sent out to all heads of departments asking

whether any changes in the scope or character of examinations are

required. In other words, the departments prescribe the requirements

and qualifications desired, and the Civil Service Commission

co-operates with them in securing persons with these qualifications and

insuring open and impartial competition. In a large number of

examinations (as, for example, those for trades positions), there are

no educational requirements whatever, and a person who can neither read

nor write may pass with a high average. Vacancies in the service are

filled with reasonable expedition, and the machinery of the Commission,

which reaches every part of the country, is the best agency that has

yet been devised for finding people with the most suitable

qualifications for the various offices to be filled. Written

competitive examinations do not make an ideal method for filling

positions, but they do represent an immeasurable advance upon the

"spoils" method, under which outside politicians really make the

appointments nominally made by the executive officers, the appointees

being chosen by the politicians in question, in the great majority of

cases, for reasons totally unconnected with the needs of the service or

of the public.

Statistics gathered by the Census Bureau show that the tenure of office

in the Government service does not differ materially from that enjoyed

by employes of large business corporations. Heads of executive

departments and members of the Commission have called my attention to

the fact that the rule requiring a filing of charges and three days'

notice before an employe could be separated from the service for

inefficiency has served no good purpose whatever, because that is not a

matter upon which a hearing of the employe found to be inefficient can

be of any value, and in practice the rule providing for such notice and

hearing has merely resulted in keeping in a certain number of

incompetents, because of the reluctance of the heads of departments and

bureau chiefs to go through the required procedure. Experience has

shown that this rule is wholly ineffective to save any man, if a

superior for improper reasons wishes to remove him, and is mischievous

because it sometimes serves to keep in the service incompetent men not

guilty of specific wrongdoing. Having these facts in view the rule has

been amended by providing that where the inefficiency or incapacity

comes within the personal knowledge of the head of a department the

removal may be made without notice, the reasons therefor being filed

and made a record of the department. The absolute right of the removal

rests where it always has rested, with the head of a department; any

limitation of this absolute right results in grave injury to the public

service. The change is merely one of procedure; it was much needed, and

it is producing good results.

The civil service law is being energetically and impartially enforced,

and in the large majority of cases complaints of violations of either

the law or rules are discovered to be unfounded. In this respect this

law compares very favorably with any other Federal statute. The

question of politics in the appointment and retention of the men

engaged in merely ministerial work has been practically eliminated in

almost the entire field of Government employment covered by the civil

service law. The action of the Congress in providing the commission

with its own force instead of requiring it to rely on detailed clerks

has been justified by the increased work done at a smaller cost to the

Government. I urge upon the Congress a careful consideration of the

recommendations contained in the annual report of the commission.

Our copyright laws urgently need revision. They are imperfect in

definition, confused and inconsistent in expression; they omit

provision for many articles which, under modern reproductive processes

are entitled to protection; they impose hardships upon the copyright

proprietor which are not essential to the fair protection of the

public; they are difficult for the courts to interpret and impossible

for the Copyright Office to administer with satisfaction to the public.

Attempts to improve them by amendment have been frequent, no less than

twelve acts for the purpose having been passed since the Revised

Statutes. To perfect them by further amendment seems impracticable. A

complete revision of them is essential. Such a revision, to meet modern

conditions, has been found necessary in Germany, Austria, Sweden, and

other foreign countries, and bills embodying it are pending in England

and the Australian colonies. It has been urged here, and proposals for

a commission to undertake it have, from time to time, been pressed upon

the Congress. The inconveniences of the present conditions being so

great, an attempt to frame appropriate legislation has been made by the

Copyright Office, which has called conferences of the various interests

especially and practically concerned with the operation of the

copyright laws. It has secured from them suggestions as to the changes

necessary; it has added from its own experience and investigations, and

it has drafted a bill which embodies such of these changes and

additions as, after full discussion and expert criticism, appeared to

be sound and safe. In form this bill would replace the existing

insufficient and inconsistent laws by one general copyright statute. It

will be presented to the Congress at the coming session. It deserves

prompt consideration.

I recommend that a law be enacted to regulate inter-State commerce in

misbranded and adulterated foods, drinks, and drugs. Such law would

protect legitimate manufacture and commerce, and would tend to secure

the health and welfare of the consuming public. Traffic in food-stuffs

which have been debased or adulterated so as to injure health or to

deceive purchasers should be forbidden.

The law forbidding the emission of dense black or gray smoke in the

city of Washington has been sustained by the courts. Something has been

accomplished under it, but much remains to be done if we would preserve

the capital city from defacement by the smoke nuisance. Repeated

prosecutions under the law have not had the desired effect. I recommend

that it be made more stringent by increasing both the minimum and

maximum fine; by providing for imprisonment in cases of repeated

violation, and by affording the remedy of injunction against the

continuation of the operation of plants which are persistent offenders.

I recommend, also, an increase in the number of inspectors, whose duty

it shall be to detect violations of the act.

I call your attention to the generous act of the State of California in

conferring upon the United States Government the ownership of the

Yosemite Valley and the Mariposa Big Tree Grove. There should be no

delay in accepting the gift, and appropriations should be made for the

including thereof in the Yosemite National Park, and for the care and

policing of the park. California has acted most wisely, as well as with

great magnanimity, in the matter. There are certain mighty natural

features of our land which should be preserved in perpetuity for our

children and our children's children. In my judgment, the Grand Canyon

of the Colorado should be made into a National park. It is greatly to

be wished that the State of New York should copy as regards Niagara

what the State of California has done as regards the Yosemite. Nothing

should be allowed to interfere with the preservation of Niagara Falls

in all their beauty and majesty. If the State cannot see to this, then

it is earnestly to be wished that she should be willing to turn it over

to the National Government, which should in such case (if possible, in

conjunction with the Canadian Government) assume the burden and

responsibility of preserving unharmed Niagara Falls; just as it should

gladly assume a similar burden and responsibility for the Yosemite

National Park, and as it has already assumed them for the Yellowstone

National Park. Adequate provision should be made by the Congress for

the proper care and supervision of all these National parks. The

boundaries of the Yellowstone National Park should be extended to the

south and east, to take in such portions of the abutting forest

reservations as will enable the Government to protect the elk on their

Winter range.

The most characteristic animal of the Western plains was the great,

shaggy-maned wild ox, the bison, commonly known as buffalo. Small

fragments of herds exist in a domesticated state here and there, a few

of them in the Yellowstone Park. Such a herd as that on the Flat-head

Reservation should not be allowed to go out of existence. Either on

some reservation or on some forest reserve like the Wichita reserve and

game refuge provision should be made for the preservation of such a

herd. I believe that the scheme would be of economic advantage, for the

robe of the buffalo is of high market value, and the same is true of

the robe of the crossbred animals.

I call your especial attention to the desirability of giving to the

members of the Life Saving Service pensions such as are given to

firemen and policemen in all our great cities. The men in the Life

Saving Service continually and in the most matter of fact way do deeds

such as make Americans proud of their country. They have no political

influence, and they live in such remote places that the really heroic

services they continually render receive the scantiest recognition from

the public. It is unjust for a great nation like this to permit these

men to become totally disabled or to meet death in the performance of

their hazardous duty and yet to give them no sort of reward. If one of

them serves thirty years of his life in such a position he should

surely be entitled to retire on half pay, as a fireman or policeman

does, and if he becomes totally incapacitated through accident or

sickness, or loses his health in the discharge of his duty, he or his

family should receive a pension just as any soldier should. I call your

attention with especial earnestness to this matter because it appeals

not only to our judgment but to our sympathy; for the people on whose

behalf I ask it are comparatively few in number, render incalculable

service of a particularly dangerous kind, and have no one to speak for

them.

During the year just past, the phase of the Indian question which has

been most sharply brought to public attention is the larger legal

significance of the Indian's induction into citizenship. This has made

itself manifest not only in a great access of litigation in which the

citizen Indian figures as a party defendant and in a more widespread

disposition to levy local taxation upon his personalty, but in a

decision of the United States Supreme Court which struck away the main

prop on which has hitherto rested the Government's benevolent effort to

protect him against the evils of intemperance. The court holds, in

effect, that when an Indian becomes, by virtue of an allotment of land

to him, a citizen of the State in which his land is situated, he passes

from under Federal control in such matters as this, and the acts of the

Congress prohibiting the sale or gift to him of intoxicants become

substantially inoperative. It is gratifying to note that the States and

municipalities of the West which have most at stake in the welfare of

the Indians are taking up this subject and are trying to supply, in a

measure at least, the abdication of its trusteeship forced upon the

Federal Government. Nevertheless, I would urgently press upon the

attention of the Congress the question whether some amendment of the

internal revenue laws might not be of aid in prosecuting those

malefactors, known in the Indian country as "bootleggers," who are

engaged at once in defrauding the United States Treasury of taxes and,

what is far more important, in debauching the Indians by carrying

liquors illicitly into territory still completely under Federal

jurisdiction.

Among the crying present needs of the Indians are more day schools

situated in the midst of their settlements, more effective instruction

in the industries pursued on their own farms, and a more liberal

tension of the field-matron service, which means the education of the

Indian women in the arts of home making. Until the mothers are well

started in the right direction we cannot reasonably expect much from

the children who are soon to form an integral part of our American

citizenship. Moreover the excuse continually advanced by male adult

Indians for refusing offers of remunerative employment at a distance

from their homes is that they dare not leave their families too long

out of their sight. One effectual remedy for this state of things is to

employ the minds and strengthen the moral fibre of the Indian

women--the end to which the work of the field matron is especially

directed. I trust that the Congress will make its appropriations for

Indian day schools and field matrons as generous as may consist with

the other pressing demands upon its providence.

During the last year the Philippine Islands have been slowly recovering

from the series of disasters which, since American occupation, have

greatly reduced the amount of agricultural products below what was

produced in Spanish times. The war, the rinderpest, the locusts, the

drought, and the cholera have been united as causes to prevent a return

of the prosperity much needed in the islands. The most serious is the

destruction by the rinderpest of more than 75 per cent of the draught

cattle, because it will take several years of breeding to restore the

necessary number of these indispensable aids to agriculture. The

commission attempted to supply by purchase from adjoining countries the

needed cattle, but the experiments made were unsuccessful. Most of the

cattle imported were unable to withstand the change of climate and the

rigors of the voyage and died from other diseases than rinderpest.

The income of the Philippine Government has necessarily been reduced by

reason of the business and agricultural depression in the islands, and

the Government has been obliged to exercise great economy to cut down

its expenses, to reduce salaries, and in every way to avoid a deficit.

It has adopted an internal revenue law, imposing taxes on cigars,

cigarettes, and distilled liquors, and abolishing the old Spanish

industrial taxes. The law has not operated as smoothly as was hoped,

and although its principle is undoubtedly correct, it may need

amendments for the purpose of reconciling the people to its provisions.

The income derived from it has partly made up for the reduction in

customs revenue.

There has been a marked increase in the number of Filipinos employed in

the civil service, and a corresponding decrease in the number of

Americans. The Government in every one of its departments has been

rendered more efficient by elimination of undesirable material and the

promotion of deserving public servants.

Improvements of harbors, roads, and bridges continue, although the

cutting down of the revenue forbids the expenditure of any great amount

from current income for these purposes. Steps are being taken, by

advertisement for competitive bids, to secure the construction and

maintenance of 1,000 miles of railway by private corporations under the

recent enabling legislation of the Congress. The transfer of the friar

lands, in accordance with the contract made some two years ago, has

been completely effected, and the purchase money paid. Provision has

just been made by statute for the speedy settlement in a special

proceeding in the Supreme Court of controversies over the possession

and title of church buildings and rectories arising between the Roman

Catholic Church and schismatics claiming under ancient municipalities.

Negotiations and hearings for the settlement of the amount due to the

Roman Catholic Church for rent and occupation of churches and rectories

by the army of the United States are in progress, and it is hoped a

satisfactory conclusion may be submitted to the Congress before the end

of the session.

Tranquillity has existed during the past year throughout the

Archipelago, except in the Province of Cavite, the Province of Batangas

and the Province of Samar, and in the Island of Jolo among the Moros.

The Jolo disturbance was put an end to by several sharp and short

engagements, and now peace prevails in the Moro Province, Cavite, the

mother of ladrones in the Spanish times, is so permeated with the

traditional sympathy of the people for ladronism as to make it

difficult to stamp out the disease. Batangas was only disturbed by

reason of the fugitive ladrones from Cavite, Samar was thrown into

disturbance by the uneducated and partly savage peoples living in the

mountains, who, having been given by the municipal code more power than

they were able to exercise discreetly, elected municipal officers who

abused their trusts, compelled the people raising hemp to sell it at a

much less price than it was worth, and by their abuses drove their

people into resistance to constituted authority. Cavite and Samar are

instances of reposing too much confidence in the self-governing power

of a people. The disturbances have all now been suppressed, and it is

hoped that with these lessons local governments can be formed which

will secure quiet and peace to the deserving inhabitants. The incident

is another proof of the fact that if there has been any error as

regards giving self-government in the Philippines it has been in the

direction of giving it too quickly, not too slowly. A year from next

April the first legislative assembly for the islands will be held. On

the sanity and self-restraint of this body much will depend so far as

the future self-government of the islands is concerned.

The most encouraging feature of the whole situation has been the very

great interest taken by the common people in education and the great

increase in the number of enrolled students in the public schools. The

increase was from 300,000 to half a million pupils. The average

attendance is about 70 per cent. The only limit upon the number of

pupils seems to be the capacity of the government to furnish teachers

and school houses.

The agricultural conditions of the islands enforce more strongly than

ever the argument in favor of reducing the tariff on the products of

the Philippine Islands entering the United States. I earnestly

recommend that the tariff now imposed by the Dingley bill upon the

products of the Philippine Islands be entirely removed, except the

tariff on sugar and tobacco, and that that tariff be reduced to 25 per

cent of the present rates under the Dingley act; that after July 1,

1909, the tariff upon tobacco and sugar produced in the Philippine

Islands be entirely removed, and that free trade between the islands

and the United States in the products of each country then be provided

for by law.

A statute in force, enacted April 15, 1904, suspends the operation of

the coastwise laws of the United States upon the trade between the

Philippine Islands and the United States until July 1, 1906. I

earnestly recommend that this suspension be postponed until July 1,

1909. I think it of doubtful utility to apply the coastwise laws to the

trade between the United States and the Philippines under any

circumstances, because I am convinced that it will do no good whatever

to American bottoms, and will only interfere and be an obstacle to the

trade between the Philippines and the United States, but if the

coastwise law must be thus applied, certainly it ought not to have

effect until free trade is enjoyed between the people of the United

States and the people of the Philippine Islands in their respective

products.

I do not anticipate that free trade between the islands and the United

States will produce a revolution in the sugar and tobacco production of

the Philippine Islands. So primitive are the methods of agriculture in

the Philippine Islands, so slow is capital in going to the islands, so

many difficulties surround a large agricultural enterprise in the

islands, that it will be many, many years before the products of those

islands will have any effect whatever upon the markets of the United

States. The problem of labor is also a formidable one with the sugar

and tobacco producers in the islands. The best friends of the Filipino

people and the people themselves are utterly opposed to the admission

of Chinese coolie labor. Hence the only solution is the training of

Filipino labor, and this will take a long time. The enactment of a law

by the Congress of the United States making provision for free trade

between the islands and the United States, however, will be of great

importance from a political and sentimental standpoint; and, while its

actual benefit has doubtless been exaggerated by the people of the

islands, they will accept this measure of justice as an indication that

the people of the United States are anxious to aid the people of the

Philippine Islands in every way, and especially in the agricultural

development of their archipelago. It will aid the Filipinos without

injuring interests in America.

In my judgment immediate steps should be taken for the fortification of

Hawaii. This is the most important point in the Pacific to fortify in

order to conserve the interests of this country. It would be hard to

overstate the importance of this need. Hawaii is too heavily taxed.

Laws should be enacted setting aside for a period of, say, twenty years

75 per cent of the internal revenue and customs receipts from Hawaii as

a special fund to be expended in the islands for educational and public

buildings, and for harbor improvements and military and naval defenses.

It cannot be too often repeated that our aim must be to develop the

territory of Hawaii on traditional American lines. That territory has

serious commercial and industrial problems to reckon with; but no

measure of relief can be considered which looks to legislation

admitting Chinese and restricting them by statute to field labor and

domestic service. The status of servility can never again be tolerated

on American soil. We cannot concede that the proper solution of its

problems is special legislation admitting to Hawaii a class of laborers

denied admission to the other States and Territories. There are

obstacles, and great obstacles, in the way of building up a

representative American community in the Hawaiian Islands; but it is

not in the American character to give up in the face of difficulty.

Many an American Commonwealth has been built up against odds equal to

those that now confront Hawaii.

No merely half-hearted effort to meet its problems as other American

communities have met theirs can be accepted as final. Hawaii shall

never become a territory in which a governing class of rich planters

exists by means of coolie labor. Even if the rate of growth of the

Territory is thereby rendered slower, the growth must only take place

by the admission of immigrants fit in the end to assume the duties and

burdens of full American citizenship. Our aim must be to develop the

Territory on the same basis of stable citizenship as exists on this

continent.

I earnestly advocate the adoption of legislation which will explicitly

confer American citizenship on all citizens of Porto Rico. There is, in

my judgment, no excuse for failure to do this. The harbor of San Juan

should be dredged and improved. The expenses of the Federal Court of

Porto Rico should be met from the Federal Treasury and not from the

Porto Rican treasury. The elections in Porto Rico should take place

every four years, and the Legislature should meet in session every two

years. The present form of government in Porto Rico, which provides for

the appointment by the President of the members of the Executive

Council or upper house of the Legislature, has proved satisfactory and

has inspired confidence in property owners and investors. I do not deem

it advisable at the present time to change this form in any material

feature. The problems and needs of the island are industrial and

commercial rather than political.

I wish to call the attention of the Congress to one question which

affects our insular possessions generally; namely, the need of an

increased liberality in the treatment of the whole franchise question

in these islands. In the proper desire to prevent the islands being

exploited by speculators and to have them develop in the interests of

their own people an error has been made in refusing to grant

sufficiently liberal terms to induce the investment of American capital

in the Philippines and in Porto Rico. Elsewhere in this message I have

spoken strongly against the jealousy of mere wealth, and especially of

corporate wealth as such. But it is particularly regrettable to allow

any such jealousy to be developed when we are dealing either with our

insular or with foreign affairs. The big corporation has achieved its

present position in the business world simply because it is the most

effective instrument in business competition. In foreign affairs we

cannot afford to put our people at a disadvantage with their

competitors by in any way discriminating against the efficiency of our

business organizations. In the same way we cannot afford to allow our

insular possessions to lag behind in industrial development from any

twisted jealousy of business success. It is, of course, a mere truism

to say that the business interests of the islands will only be

developed if it becomes the financial interest of somebody to develop

them. Yet this development is one of the things most earnestly to be

wished for in the interest of the islands themselves. We have been

paying all possible heed to the political and educational interests of

the islands, but, important though these objects are, it is not less

important that we should favor their industrial development. The

Government can in certain ways help this directly, as by building good

roads; but the fundamental and vital help must be given through the

development of the industries of the islands, and a most efficient

means to this end is to encourage big American corporations to start

industries in them, and this means to make it advantageous for them to

do so. To limit the ownership of mining claims, as has been done in the

Philippines, is absurd. In both the Philippines and Porto Rico the

limit of holdings of land should be largely raised.

I earnestly ask that Alaska be given an elective delegate. Some person

should be chosen who can speak with authority of the needs of the

Territory. The Government should aid in the construction of a railroad

from the Gulf of Alaska to the Yukon River, in American territory. In

my last two messages I advocated certain additional action on behalf of

Alaska. I shall not now repeat those recommendations, but I shall lay

all my stress upon the one recommendation of giving to Alaska some one

authorized to speak for it. I should prefer that the delegate was made

elective, but if this is not deemed wise, then make him appointive. At

any rate, give Alaska some person whose business it shall be to speak

with authority on her behalf to the Congress. The natural resources of

Alaska are great. Some of the chief needs of the peculiarly energetic,

self-reliant, and typically American white population of Alaska were

set forth in my last message. I also earnestly ask your attention to

the needs of the Alaskan Indians. All Indians who are competent should

receive the full rights of American citizenship. It is, for instance, a

gross and indefensible wrong to deny to such hard-working,

decent-living Indians as the Metlakahtlas the right to obtain licenses

as captains, pilots, and engineers; the right to enter mining claims,

and to profit by the homestead law. These particular Indians are

civilized and are competent and entitled to be put on the same basis

with the white men round about them.

I recommend that Indian Territory and Oklahoma be admitted as one State

and that New Mexico and Arizona be admitted as one State. There is no

obligation upon us to treat territorial subdivisions, which are matters

of convenience only, as binding us on the question of admission to

Statehood. Nothing has taken up more time in the Congress during the

past few years than the question as to the Statehood to be granted to

the four Territories above mentioned, and after careful consideration

of all that has been developed in the discussions of the question, I

recommend that they be immediately admitted as two States. There is no

justification for further delay; and the advisability of making the

four Territories into two States has been clearly established.

In some of the Territories the legislative assemblies issue licenses

for gambling. The Congress should by law forbid this practice, the

harmful results of which are obvious at a glance.

The treaty between the United States and the Republic of Panama, under

which the construction of the Panama Canal was made possible, went into

effect with its ratification by the United States Senate on February

23, 1904. The canal properties of the French Canal Company were

transferred to the United States on April 23, 1904, on payment of

$40,000,000 to that company. On April 1, 1905, the Commission was

reorganized, and it now consists of Theodore P. Shonts, Chairman;

Charles E. Magoon, Benjamin M. Harrod, Rear Admiral Mordecai T.

Endicott, Brig. Gen. Peter C. Hains, and Col. Oswald H. Ernst. John F.

Stevens was appointed Chief Engineer on July 1 last. Active work in

canal construction, mainly preparatory, has been in progress for less

than a year and a half. During that period two points about the canal

have ceased to be open to debate: First, the question of route; the

canal will be built on the Isthmus of Panama. Second, the question of

feasibility; there are no physical obstacles on this route that

American engineering skill will not be able to overcome without serious

difficulty, or that will prevent the completion of the canal within a

reasonable time and at a reasonable cost. This is virtually the

unanimous testimony of the engineers who have investigated the matter

for the Government.

The point which remains unsettled is the question of type, whether the

canal shall be one of several locks above sea level, or at sea level

with a single tide lock. On this point I hope to lay before the

Congress at an early day the findings of the Advisory Board of American

and European Engineers, that at my invitation have been considering the

subject, together with the report of the Commission thereon, and such

comments thereon or recommendations in reference thereto as may seem

necessary.