taken by the Army during the war be removed from the offices of the Quartermaster and Commissary Generals and transferred to the Southern Claims Commission. These claims are of precisely similar nature to those now before the Southern Claims Commission, and the War Department bureaus have not the clerical force for their examination nor proper machinery for investigating the loyalty of the claimants.
Second. That Congress sanction the scheme of an annuity fund for the benefit of the families of deceased officers, and that it also provide for the permanent organization of the Signal Service, both of which were recommended in my last annual message.
Third. That the manufacturing operations of the Ordnance Department be concentrated at three arsenals and an armory, and that the remaining arsenals be sold and the proceeds applied to this object by the Ordnance Department.
The appropriations for river and harbor improvements for the current year were $5,015,000. With my approval, the Secretary of War directed that of this amount $2,000,000 should be expended, and no new works should be begun and none prosecuted which were not of national importance. Subsequently this amount was increased to $2,237,600, and the works are now progressing on this basis.
The improvement of the South Pass of the Mississippi River, under James B. Eads and his associates, is progressing favorably. At the present time there is a channel of 20.3 feet in depth between the jetties at the mouth of the pass and 18.5 feet at the head of the pass. Neither channel, however, has the width required before payments can be made by the United States. A commission of engineer officers is now examining these works, and their reports will be presented as soon as received.
The report of the Secretary of the Navy shows that branch of the service to be in condition as effective as it is possible to keep it with the means and authority given the Department. It is, of course, not possible to rival the costly and progressive establishments of great European powers with the old material of our Navy, to which no increase has been authorized since the war, except the eight small cruisers built to supply the place of others which had gone to decay. Yet the most has been done that was possible with the means at command; and by substantially rebuilding some of our old ships with durable material and completely repairing and refitting our monitor fleet the Navy has been gradually so brought up that, though it does not maintain its relative position among the progressive navies of the world, it is now in a condition more powerful and effective than it ever has been in time of peace.
The complete repairs of our five heavy ironclads are only delayed on account of the inadequacy of the appropriations made last year for the working bureaus of the Department, which were actually less in amount than those made before the war, notwithstanding the greatly enhanced price of labor and materials and the increase in the cost of the naval service growing out of the universal use and great expense of steam machinery. The money necessary for these repairs should be provided at once, that they may be completed without further unnecessary delay and expense.
When this is done, all the strength that there is in our Navy will be developed and useful to its full capacity, and it will be powerful for purposes of defense, and also for offensive action, should the necessity for that arise within a reasonable distance from our shores.
The fact that our Navy is not more modern and powerful than it is has been made a cause of complaint against the Secretary of the Navy by persons who at the same time criticise and complain of his endeavors to bring the Navy that we have to its best and most efficient condition; but the good sense of the country will understand that it is really due to his practical action that we have at this time any effective naval force at command.
The report of the Postmaster-General shows the excess of expenditures (excluding expenditures on account of previous years) over receipts for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1876, to be $4,151,988.66.
Estimated expenditures for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1878, are $36,723,432.43.
Estimated revenue for same period is $30,645,165, leaving estimated excess of expenditure, to be appropriated as a deficiency, of $6,078,267.43.
The Postmaster-General, like his predecessor, is convinced that a change in the basis of adjusting the salaries of postmasters of the fourth class is necessary for the good of the service as well as for the interests of the Government, and urgently recommends that the compensation of the class of postmasters above mentioned be based upon the business of their respective offices, as ascertained from the sworn returns to the Auditor of stamps canceled.
A few postmasters in the Southern States have expressed great apprehension of their personal safety on account of their connection with the postal service, and have specially requested that their reports of apprehended danger should not be made public lest it should result in the loss of their lives. But no positive testimony of interference has been submitted, except in the case of a mail messenger at Spartanburg, in South Carolina, who reported that he had been violently driven away while in charge of the mails on account of his political affiliations. An assistant superintendent of the Railway Mail Service investigated this case and reported that the messenger had disappeared from his post, leaving his work to be performed by a substitute. The Postmaster-General thinks this case is sufficiently suggestive to justify him in recommending that a more severe punishment should be provided for the offense of assaulting any person in charge of the mails or of retarding or otherwise obstructing them by threats of personal injury.
“A very gratifying result is presented in the fact that the deficiency of this Department during the last fiscal year was reduced to $4,081,790.18, as against $6,169,938.88 of the preceding year. The difference can be traced to the large increase in its ordinary receipts (which greatly exceed the estimates therefor) and a slight decrease in its expenditures.”
The ordinary _receipts_ of the Post-Office Department for the past seven fiscal years have increased at an average of over 8 per cent per annum, while the increase of _expenditures_ for the same period has been but about 5.50 per cent per annum, and the _decrease_ of _deficiency_ in the revenues has been at the rate of nearly 2 per cent per annum.
The report of the Commissioner of Agriculture accompanying this message will be found one of great interest, marking, as it does, the great progress of the last century in the variety of products of the soil; increased knowledge and skill in the labor of producing, saving, and manipulating the same to prepare them for the use of man; in the improvements in machinery to aid the agriculturist in his labors, and in a knowledge of those scientific subjects necessary to a thorough system of economy in agricultural production, namely, chemistry, botany, entomology, etc. A study of this report by those interested in agriculture and deriving their support from it will find it of value in pointing out those articles which are raised in greater quantity than the needs of the world require, and must sell, therefore, for less than the cost of production, and those which command a profit over cost of production because there is not an overproduction.
I call special attention to the need of the Department for a new gallery for the reception of the exhibits returned from the Centennial Exhibition, including the exhibits donated by very many foreign nations, and to the recommendations of the Commissioner of Agriculture generally.
The reports of the District Commissioners and the board of health are just received–too late to read them and to make recommendations thereon–and are herewith submitted.
The international exhibition held in Philadelphia this year, in commemoration of the one hundredth anniversary of American independence, has proven a great success, and will, no doubt, be of enduring advantage to the country. It has shown the great progress in the arts, sciences, and mechanical skill made in a single century, and demonstrated that we are but little behind older nations in any one branch, while in some we scarcely have a rival. It has served, too, not only to bring peoples and products of skill and labor from all parts of the world together, but in bringing together people from all sections of our own country, which must prove a great benefit in the information imparted and pride of country engendered.
It has been suggested by scientists interested in and connected with the Smithsonian Institution, in a communication herewith, that the Government exhibit be removed to the capital and a suitable building be erected or purchased for its accommodation as a permanent exhibit. I earnestly recommend this; and believing that Congress would second this view, I directed that all Government exhibits at the Centennial Exhibition should remain where they are, except such as might be injured by remaining in a building not intended as a protection in inclement weather, or such as may be wanted by the Department furnishing them, until the question of permanent exhibition is acted on.
Although the moneys appropriated by Congress to enable the participation of the several Executive Departments in the International Exhibition of 1876 were not sufficient to carry out the undertaking to the full extent at first contemplated, it gives me pleasure to refer to the very efficient and creditable manner in which the board appointed from these several Departments to provide an exhibition on the part of the Government have discharged their duties with the funds placed at their command. Without a precedent to guide them in the preparation of such a display, the success of their labors was amply attested by the sustained attention which the contents of the Government building attracted during the period of the exhibition from both foreign and native visitors.
I am strongly impressed with the value of the collection made by the Government for the purposes of the exhibition, illustrating, as it does, the mineral resources of the country, the statistical and practical evidences of our growth as a nation, and the uses of the mechanical arts and the applications of applied science in the administration of the affairs of Government.
Many nations have voluntarily contributed their exhibits to the United States to increase the interest in any permanent exhibition Congress may provide for. For this act of generosity they should receive the thanks of the people, and I respectfully suggest that a resolution of Congress to that effect be adopted.
The attention of Congress can not be too earnestly called to the necessity of throwing some greater safeguard over the method of choosing and declaring the election of a President. Under the present system there seems to be no provided remedy for contesting the election in any one State. The remedy is partially, no doubt, in the enlightenment of electors. The compulsory support of the free school and the disfranchisement of all who can not read and write the English language, after a fixed probation, would meet my hearty approval. I would not make this apply, however, to those already voters, but I would to all becoming so after the expiration of the probation fixed upon. Foreigners coming to this country to become citizens, who are educated in their own language, should acquire the requisite knowledge of ours during the necessary residence to obtain naturalization. If they did not take interest enough in our language to acquire sufficient knowledge of it to enable them to study the institutions and laws of the country intelligently, I would not confer upon them the right to make such laws nor to select those who do.
I append to this message, for convenient reference, a synopsis of administrative events and of all recommendations to Congress made by me during the last seven years. Time may show some of these recommendations not to have been wisely conceived, but I believe the larger part will do no discredit to the Administration. One of these recommendations met with the united opposition of one political party in the Senate and with a strong opposition from the other, namely, the treaty for the annexation of Santo Domingo to the United States, to which I will specially refer, maintaining, as I do, that if my views had been concurred in the country would be in a more prosperous condition to-day, both politically and financially.
Santo Domingo is fertile, and upon its soil may be grown just those tropical products of which the United States use so much, and which are produced or prepared for market now by slave labor almost exclusively, namely, sugar, coffee, dyewoods, mahogany, tropical fruits, tobacco, etc. About 75 per cent of the exports of Cuba are consumed in the United States. A large percentage of the exports of Brazil also find the same market. These are paid for almost exclusively in coin, legislation, particularly in Cuba, being unfavorable to a mutual exchange of the products of each country. Flour shipped from the Mississippi River to Havana can pass by the very entrance to the city on its way to a port in Spain, there pay a duty fixed upon articles to be reexported, transferred to a Spanish vessel and brought back almost to the point of starting, paying a second duty, and still leave a profit over what would be received by direct shipment. All that is produced in Cuba could be produced in Santo Domingo. Being a part of the United States, commerce between the island and mainland would be free. There would be no export duties on her shipments nor import duties on those coming here. There would be no import duties upon the supplies, machinery, etc., going from the States. The effect that would have been produced upon Cuban commerce, with these advantages to a rival, is observable at a glance. The Cuban question would have been settled long ago in favor of “free Cuba.” Hundreds of American vessels would now be advantageously used in transporting the valuable woods and other products of the soil of the island to a market and in carrying supplies and emigrants to it. The island is but sparsely settled, while it has an area sufficient for the profitable employment of several millions of people. The soil would have soon fallen into the hands of United States capitalists. The products are so valuable in commerce that emigration there would have been encouraged; the emancipated race of the South would have found there a congenial home, where their civil rights would not be disputed and where their labor would be so much sought after that the poorest among them could have found the means to go. Thus in cases of great oppression and cruelty, such as has been practiced upon them in many places within the last eleven years, whole communities would have sought refuge in Santo Domingo. I do not suppose the whole race would have gone, nor is it desirable that they should go. Their labor is desirable–indispensable almost–where they now are. But the possession of this territory would have left the negro “master of the situation,” by enabling him to demand his rights at home on pain of finding them elsewhere.
I do not present these views now as a recommendation for a renewal of the subject of annexation, but I do refer to it to vindicate my previous action in regard to it.
With the present term of Congress my official life terminates. It is not probable that public affairs will ever again receive attention from me further than as a citizen of the Republic, always taking a deep interest in the honor, integrity, and prosperity of the whole land.
U.S. GRANT.
[Footnote 115: See pp. 390-391.]
[Footnote 116: See pp. 394-395.]
[Footnote 117: See pp. 392-394.]
SPECIAL MESSAGES.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, _December 6, 1876_.
_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:
I have the honor to transmit herewith a letter (accompanied by testimony) addressed to me by Hon. John Sherman and other distinguished citizens, in regard to the canvass of the vote for electors in the State of Louisiana.
U.S. GRANT.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, _December 14, 1876_.
_To the House of Representatives_:
In answer to a resolution of the 7th instant of the House of Representatives, asking to be informed whether any, and what, negotiations have or are being made with the Sioux Indians for their removal to the Indian Territory, and under what authority the same has been and is being done, I submit herewith a report received from the Secretary of the Interior, which contains, it is believed, all the information in possession of his Department touching the matter of the resolution.
U.S. GRANT.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, _December 14, 1876_.
_To the Senate of the United States_:
In answer to the resolution of the Senate of the 6th instant, requesting information “as to whether troops of the United States were stationed at the city of Petersburg, in the State of Virginia, on the 7th of November, 1876, and, if so, under what authority and for what purpose,” I submit the inclosed letters from the Secretary of War, to whom the resolution was referred, together with the report of the General of the Army and accompanying papers.
These inclosures will give all the information called for by the resolution, and I confidently believe will justify the action taken. It is well understood that the presence of United States troops at polling places never prevented the free exercise of the franchise by any citizen, of whatever political faith. If, then, they have had any effect whatever upon the ballot cast, it has been to insure protection to the citizen casting it, in giving it to the candidate of his unbiased choice, without fear, and thus securing the very essence of liberty. It may be the presence of twenty-four United States soldiers, under the command of a captain and lieutenant, quartered in the custom-house at Petersburg, Va., on the 7th of November, at a considerable distance from any polling place, without any interference on their part whatever, and without going near the polls during the election, _may have secured a different result from what would have been obtained if they had not been there_ (to maintain the peace in case of riot) _on the face of the returns_; but if such is the case it is only proof that in this one Congressional district in the State of Virginia the legal and constitutional voters have been able to return as elected the candidate of their choice.
U.S. GRANT.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, _December 22, 1876_.
_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:
I have the honor to transmit herewith a letter, submitted by the Secretary of the Interior, from the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, accompanied by the report and journal of proceedings of the commission appointed on the 24th day of August last to obtain certain concessions from the Sioux Indians, in accordance with the provisions contained in the Indian appropriation act for the current fiscal year.
I ask your special consideration of these articles of agreement, as among other advantages to be gained by them is the clear right of citizens to go into a country of which they have taken possession and from which they can not be excluded.
U.S. GRANT.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, _December 22, 1876_.
_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:
I have the honor to transmit herewith a report (and papers which accompanied it) of the progress of the work committed to their charge, addressed to me by the commissioners appointed under the act of Congress approved July 19, 1876, authorizing the repavement of Pennsylvania avenue.
U.S. GRANT.
WASHINGTON, _December 23, 1876_.
_To the House of Representatives_:
When Congress adjourned in August last the execution of the extradition article of the treaty of 1842 between the United States and Great Britain had been interrupted.
The United States had demanded of Her Majesty’s Government the surrender of certain fugitives from justice charged with crimes committed within the jurisdiction of the United States, who had sought asylum and were found within the territories of Her British Majesty, and had, in due compliance with the requirements of the treaty, furnished the evidence of the criminality of the fugitives, which had been found sufficient to justify their apprehension and commitment for trial, as required by the treaty, and the fugitives were held and committed for extradition.
Her Majesty’s Government, however, demanded from the United States certain assurances or stipulations as a condition for the surrender of these fugitives.
As the treaty contemplated no such conditions to the performance of the obligations which each Government had assumed, the demand for stipulations on the part of this Government was repelled.
Her Majesty’s Government thereupon, in June last, released two of the fugitives (Ezra D. Winslow and Charles J. Brent), and subsequently released a third (one William E. Gray), and, refusing to surrender, set them at liberty.
In a message to the two Houses of Congress on the 20th day of June last, in view of the condition of facts as above referred to, I said:
The position thus taken by the British Government, if adhered to, can not but be regarded as the abrogation and annulment of the article of the treaty on extradition.
Under these circumstances it will not, in my judgment, comport with the dignity or self-respect of this Government to make demands upon that Government for the surrender of fugitive criminals, nor to entertain any requisition of that character from that Government under the treaty.
Article XI of the treaty of 1842 provided that “the tenth article [that relating to extradition] should continue in force until one or the other of the parties should signify its wish to terminate it, and no longer.”
In view, however, of the great importance of an extradition treaty, especially between two states as intimately connected in commercial and social relations as are the United States and Great Britain, and in the hope that Her Majesty’s Government might yet reach a different decision from that then attained, I abstained from recommending any action by Congress terminating the extradition article of the treaty. I have, however, declined to take any steps under the treaty toward extradition.
It is with great satisfaction that I am able now to announce to Congress and to the country that by the voluntary act of Her Majesty’s Government the obstacles which had been interposed to the execution of the extradition article of the treaty have been removed.
On the 27th of October last Her Majesty’s representative at this capital, under instructions from Lord Derby, informed this Government that Her Majesty’s Government would be prepared, as a temporary measure, until a new extradition treaty can be concluded, to put in force all powers vested in it for the surrender of accused persons to the Government of the United States under the treaty of 1842, without asking for any engagement as to such persons not being tried in the United States for other than the offenses for which extradition had been demanded.
I was happy to greet this announcement as the removal of the obstacles which had arrested the execution of the extradition treaty between the two countries.
In reply to the note of Her Majesty’s representative, after referring to the applications heretofore made by the United States for the surrender of the fugitives referred to in the correspondence which was laid before Congress at its last session, it was stated that on an indication of readiness to surrender these persons an agent would be authorized to receive them, and I would be ready to respond to requisitions which may be made on the part of Her Majesty’s Government under the tenth article of the treaty of 1842, which I would then regard as in full force until such time as either Government shall avail itself of the right to terminate it provided by the eleventh article, or until a more comprehensive arrangement can be reached between the two Governments in regard to the extradition of criminals–an object to which the attention of this Government would gladly be given, with an earnest desire for a mutually satisfactory result.
A copy of the correspondence between Her Majesty’s representative at this capital and the Secretary of State on the subject is transmitted herewith.
It is with great satisfaction that I have now to announce that Her Majesty’s Government, while expressing its desire not to be understood to recede from the interpretation which in its previous correspondence it has put upon the treaty, but having regard to the prospect of a new treaty and the power possessed by either party of spontaneously denouncing the old one, caused the rearrest on the 4th instant of Brent, one of the fugitives who had been previously discharged, and, after awaiting the requisite time within which the fugitive is entitled to appeal or to apply for his discharge, on the 21st instant surrendered him to the agent appointed on behalf of this Government to receive and to convey him to the United States.
Her Majesty’s Government has expressed an earnest desire to rearrest and to deliver up Winslow and Gray, the other fugitives who had been arrested and committed on the requisition of the United States, but were released because of the refusal of the United States to give the assurances and stipulations then required by Great Britain. These persons, however, are believed to have escaped from British jurisdiction; a diligent search has failed to discover them.
As the surrender of Brent without condition or stipulation of any kind being asked removes the obstacle which interrupted the execution of the treaty, I shall no longer abstain from making demands upon Her Majesty’s Government for the surrender of fugitive criminals, nor from entertaining requisitions of that character from that Government under the treaty of 1842, but will again regard the treaty as operative, hoping to be able before long to conclude with Her Majesty’s Government a new treaty of a broader and more comprehensive nature.
U.S. GRANT.
WASHINGTON, _January 8, 1877_.
_To the House of Representatives_:
In answer to the resolution of the House of Representatives of the 19th ultimo, I transmit herewith the report of the Secretary of State, together with the papers[118] which accompanied it.
U.S. GRANT.
[Footnote 118: Correspondence relative to the Venezuelan mixed commission held under the convention of April 25, 1866, for the settlement of claims against Venezuela.]
[For message of January 12, 1877, withdrawing objections to Senate bill No. 561, see pp. 389-390.]
EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 12, 1877_.
_To the House of Representatives_:
In reply to a resolution of inquiry dated December 23, 1876, of the House of Representatives, respecting the expenditure of certain moneys appropriated by the act of August 14, 1876, for river and harbor improvements, I have the honor to transmit herewith, for your information, a report and accompanying papers received from the Secretary of War, to whom the resolution was referred.
U.S. GRANT.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 15, 1877_.
_To the House of Representatives_:
The joint resolution authorizing the Secretary of War to supply blankets to the Reform School in the District of Columbia is before me.
I am in entire sympathy with the purpose of the resolution, but before taking any action upon it I deem it my duty to submit for your consideration the accompanying letter, received from the Secretary of War, embodying a report, made in anticipation of the passage of the resolution, by the Quartermaster-General of the Army, in which, among other facts, it is stated that–
The appropriation for clothing for the Army for this fiscal year is much smaller than usual, and the supply of blankets which it will allow us to purchase is so small that none can properly be spared for other purposes than the supply of the Army.
If it be thought by Congress worth while to cause the supply of blankets for the institution referred to to be procured through the War Department, it is respectfully suggested that provision to meet the expense be made by special appropriation.
U.S. GRANT.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 19, 1877_.
_To the House of Representatives_:
At the request of the Attorney-General, I have the honor to transmit herewith a report in answer to the resolution of the House adopted on the 1st of August, 1876, relative to certain matters occurring in the administration of the provisional government of the District of Columbia, and chiefly affecting the Commissioners and the late board of audit.
U.S. GRANT.
WASHINGTON, _January 20, 1877_.
_To the Senate of the United States_:
Herewith I transmit a report from the Secretary of State, with accompanying papers, relating to the Court of Commissioners of Alabama Claims.
U.S. GRANT.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 22, 1877_.
_To the House of Representatives_:
In answer to the resolution of the House of Representatives of the 8th of December last, inquiring whether any increase in the cavalry force of the army on the Mexican frontier of Texas has been made, as authorized by the act of July 24, 1876, and whether any troops have been removed from the frontier of Texas and from the post of Fort Sill, on the Kiowa and Comanche Reservation, and whether, if so, their places have been supplied by other forces, I have the honor to transmit a report received from the Secretary of War.
U.S. GRANT.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 22, 1877_.
_To the House of Representatives_:
On the 9th day of December, 1876, the following resolution of the House of Representatives was received, namely:
_Resolved_, That the President be requested, if not incompatible with the public interest, to transmit to this House copies of any and all orders or directions emanating from him or from either of the Executive Departments of the Government to any military commander or civil officer with reference to the service of the Army, or any portion thereof, in the States of Virginia, South Carolina, Louisiana, and Florida since the 1st of August last, together with reports by telegraph or otherwise from either or any of said military commanders or civil officers.
It was immediately or soon thereafter referred to the Secretary of War and the Attorney-General, the custodians of all retained copies of “orders or directions” given by the Executive Departments of the Government covered by the above inquiry, together with all information upon which such “orders or directions” were given.
The information, it will be observed, is voluminous, and, with the limited clerical force in the Department of Justice, has consumed the time up to the present. Many of the communications accompanying this have been already made public in connection with messages heretofore sent to Congress. This class of information includes the important documents received from the governor of South Carolina and sent to Congress with my message on the subject of the Hamburg massacre; also the documents accompanying my response to the resolution of the House of Representatives in regard to the soldiers stationed at Petersburg.
There have also come to me and to the Department of Justice, from time to time, other earnest written communications from persons holding public trusts and from others residing in the South, some of which I append hereto as bearing upon the precarious condition of the public peace in those States. These communications I have reason to regard as made by respectable and responsible men. Many of them deprecate the publication of their names as involving danger to them personally.
The reports heretofore made by committees of Congress of the results of their inquiries in Mississippi and Louisiana, and the newspapers of several States recommending “the Mississippi plan,” have also furnished important data for estimating the danger to the public peace and order in those States.
It is enough to say that these different kinds and sources of evidence have left no doubt whatever in my mind that intimidation has been used, and actual violence, to an extent requiring the aid of the United States Government, where it was practicable to furnish such aid, in South Carolina, in Florida, and in Louisiana, as well as in Mississippi, in Alabama, and in Georgia.
The troops of the United States have been but sparingly used, and in no case so as to interfere with the free exercise of the right of suffrage. Very few troops were available for the purpose of preventing or suppressing the violence and intimidation existing in the States above named. In no case, except that of South Carolina, was the number of soldiers in any State increased in anticipation of the election, saving that twenty-four men and an officer were sent from Fort Foote to Petersburg, Va., where disturbances were threatened prior to the election.
No troops were stationed at the voting places. In Florida and in Louisiana, respectively, the small number of soldiers already in the said States were stationed at such points in each State as were most threatened with violence, where they might be available as a posse for the officer whose duty it was to preserve the peace and prevent intimidation of voters. Such a disposition of the troops seemed to me reasonable and justified bylaw and precedent, while its omission would have been inconsistent with the constitutional duty of the President of the United States “to take care that the laws be faithfully executed.” The statute expressly forbids the bringing of troops to the polls “except where it is necessary to keep the peace,” implying that to keep the peace it may be done. But this even, so far as I am advised, has not in any case been done. The stationing of a company or part of a company in the vicinity, where they would be available to prevent riot, has been the only use made of troops prior to and at the time of the elections. Where so stationed, they could be called in an emergency requiring it by a marshal or deputy marshal as a posse to aid in suppressing unlawful violence. The evidence which has come to me has left me no ground to doubt that if there had been more military force available it would have been my duty to have disposed of it in several States with a view to the prevention of the violence and intimidation which have undoubtedly contributed to the defeat of the election law in Mississippi, Alabama, and Georgia, as well as in South Carolina, Louisiana, and Florida.
By Article IV, section 4, of the Constitution–
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion, and on application of the legislature, or of the executive (when the legislature can not be convened), against domestic violence.
By act of Congress (U.S. Revised Statutes, secs. 1034, 1035) the President, in case of “insurrection in any State” or of “unlawful obstruction to the enforcement of the laws of the United States by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings,” or whenever “domestic violence in any State so obstructs the execution of the laws thereof and of the United States as to deprive any portion of the people of such State” of their civil or political rights, is authorized to employ such parts of the land and naval forces as he may deem necessary to enforce the execution of the laws and preserve the peace and sustain the authority of the State and of the United States. Acting under this title (69) of the Revised Statutes United States, I accompanied the sending of troops to South Carolina with a proclamation[119] such as is therein prescribed.
The President is also authorized by act of Congress “to employ such part of the land or naval forces of the United States * * * as shall be necessary to prevent the violation and to enforce the due execution of the provisions” of title 24 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, for the protection of the civil rights of citizens, among which is the provision against conspiracies “to prevent, by force, intimidation, or threat, any citizen who is lawfully entitled to vote from giving his support or advocacy in a legal manner toward or in favor of the election of any lawfully qualified person as an elector for President or Vice-President or as a member of Congress of the United States.” (U.S. Revised Statutes, sec. 1989.)
In cases falling under this title I have not considered it necessary to issue a proclamation to precede or accompany the employment of such part of the Army as seemed to be necessary.
In case of insurrection against a State government or against the Government of the United States a proclamation is appropriate; but in keeping the peace of the United States at an election at which Members of Congress are elected no such call from the State or proclamation by the President is prescribed by statute or required by precedent.
In the case of South Carolina insurrection and domestic violence against the State government were clearly shown, and the application of the governor founded thereon was duly presented, and I could not deny his constitutional request without abandoning my duty as the Executive of the National Government.
The companies stationed in the other States have been employed to secure the better execution of the laws of the United States and to preserve the peace of the United States.
After the election had been had, and where violence was apprehended by which the returns from the counties and precincts might be destroyed, troops were ordered to the State of Florida, and those already in Louisiana were ordered to the points in greatest danger of violence.
I have not employed troops on slight occasions, nor in any case where it has not been necessary to the enforcement of the laws of the United States. In this I have been guided by the Constitution and the laws which have been enacted and the precedents which have been formed under it.
It has been necessary to employ troops occasionally to overcome resistance to the internal-revenue laws from the time of the resistance to the collection of the whisky tax in Pennsylvania, under Washington, to the present time.
In 1854, when it was apprehended that resistance would be made in Boston to the seizure and return to his master of a fugitive slave, the troops there stationed were employed to enforce the master’s right under the Constitution, and troops stationed at New York were ordered to be in readiness to go to Boston if it should prove to be necessary.
In 1859, when John Brown, with a small number of men, made his attack upon Harpers Ferry, the President ordered United States troops to assist in the apprehension and suppression of him and his party without a formal call of the legislature or governor of Virginia and without proclamation of the President.
Without citing further instances in which the Executive has exercised his power, as Commander of the Army and Navy, to prevent or suppress resistance to the laws of the United States, or where he has exercised like authority in obedience to a call from a State to suppress insurrection, I desire to assure both Congress and the country that it has been my purpose to administer the executive powers of the Government fairly, and in no instance to disregard or transcend the limits of the Constitution.
U.S. GRANT.
[Footnote 119: See pp. 396-397.]
WASHINGTON, _January 23, 1877_.
_To the Senate of the United States_:
I transmit, in answer to a resolution of the Senate of the 16th instant, a report of the Secretary of State, with its accompanying papers.[120]
U.S. GRANT.
[Footnote 120: Correspondence with diplomatic officers of the United States in Turkey relative to atrocities and massacres by Turks in Bulgaria.]
WASHINGTON, _January 25, 1877_.
_To the Senate of the United States_:
I transmit to the Senate, for consideration with a view to ratification, a treaty between the United States and His Majesty the King of Spain, in relation to the extradition of criminals, signed on the 5th of January, 1877.
U.S. GRANT.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 29, 1877_.
_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:
I have the honor to transmit herewith the proceedings of the commission appointed to examine “the whole subject of reform and reorganization of the Army of the United States,” under the provisions of the act of Congress approved July 24, 1876.
The commission report that so fully has their time been occupied by other important duties that they are not at this time prepared to submit a plan or make proper recommendations.
U.S. GRANT.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 29, 1877_.
_To the House of Representatives_:
I have the honor to transmit herewith reports and accompanying papers received from the Secretaries of State and War, in answer to the resolution of the House of Representatives of the 9th instant, relative “to the imprisonment and detention by the Mexican authorities at Matamoras of John Jay Smith, an American citizen, and also to the wounding and robbing by Mexican soldiers at New Laredo of Dr. Samuel Huggins, an American citizen.”
U.S. GRANT.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 29, 1877_.
_To the Senate of the United States_:
I follow the example heretofore occasionally permitted of communicating in this mode my approval of the “act to provide for and regulate the counting of votes for President and Vice-President, and the decision of questions arising thereon, for the term commencing March 4, A.D. 1877,” because of my appreciation of the imminent peril to the institutions of the country from which, in my judgment, the act affords a wise and constitutional means of escape.
For the first time in the history of our country, under the Constitution as it now is, a dispute exists with regard to the result of the election of the Chief Magistrate of the nation.
It is understood that upon the disposition of disputes touching the electoral votes cast at the late election by one or more of the States depends the question whether one or the other of the candidates for the Presidency is to be the lawful Chief Magistrate. The importance of having clearly ascertained, by a procedure regulated by law, which of the two citizens has been elected, and of having the right to this high office recognized and cheerfully agreed in by all the people of the Republic, can not be overestimated, and leads me to express to Congress and to the nation my great satisfaction at the adoption of a measure that affords an orderly means of decision of a gravely exciting question.
While the history of our country in its earlier periods shows that the President of the Senate has counted the votes and declared their standing, our whole history shows that in no instance of doubt or dispute has he exercised the power of deciding, and that the two Houses of Congress have disposed of all such doubts and disputes, although in no instance hitherto have they been such that their decision could essentially have affected the result.
For the first time the Government of the United States is now brought to meet the question as one vital to the result, and this under conditions not the best calculated to produce an agreement or to induce calm feeling in the several branches of the Government or among the people of the country. In a case where, as now, the result is involved, it is the highest duty of the lawmaking power to provide in advance a constitutional, orderly, and just method of executing the Constitution in this most interesting and critical of its provisions. The doing so, far from being a compromise of right, is an enforcement of right and an execution of powers conferred by the Constitution on Congress.
I think that this orderly method has been secured by the bill, which, appealing to the Constitution and the law as the guide in ascertaining rights, provides a means of deciding questions of single returns through the direct action of Congress, and in respect to double returns by a tribunal of inquiry, whose decisions stand unless both Houses of Congress shall concur in determining otherwise, thus securing a definite disposition of all questions of dispute, in whatever aspect they may arise. With or without this law, as all of the States have voted, and as a tie vote is impossible, it must be that one of the two candidates has been elected; and it would be deplorable to witness an irregular controversy as to which of the two should receive or which should continue to hold the office. In all periods of history controversies have arisen as to the succession or choice of the chiefs of states, and no party or citizens loving their country and its free institutions can sacrifice too much of mere feeling in preserving through the upright course of law their country from the smallest danger to its peace on such an occasion; and it can not be impressed too firmly in the hearts of all the people that true liberty and real progress can exist only through a cheerful adherence to constitutional law.
The bill purports to provide only for the settlement of questions arising from the recent elections. The fact that such questions can arise demonstrates the necessity, which I can not doubt will before long be supplied, of permanent general legislation to meet cases which have not been contemplated in the Constitution or laws of the country.
The bill may not be perfect, and its provisions may not be such as would be best applicable to all future occasions, but it is calculated to meet the present condition of the question and of the country.
The country is agitated. It needs and it desires peace and quiet and harmony between all parties and all sections. Its industries are arrested, labor unemployed, capital idle, and enterprise paralyzed by reason of the doubt and anxiety attending the uncertainty of a double claim to the Chief Magistracy of the nation. It wants to be assured that the result of the election will be accepted without resistance from the supporters of the disappointed candidate, and that its highest officer shall not hold his place with a questioned title of right. Believing that the bill will secure these ends, I give it my signature.
U.S. GRANT.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 30, 1877_.
_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:
I desire to call the attention of Congress to the importance of providing for the continuance of the board for testing iron, steel, and other metals, which by the sundry civil appropriation act of last year was ordered to be discontinued at the end of the present fiscal year. This board, consisting of engineers and other scientific experts from the Army, the Navy, and from civil life (all of whom, except the secretary, give their time and labors to this object without compensation), was organized by authority of Congress in the spring of 1875, and immediately drafted a comprehensive plan for its investigations and contracted for a testing machine of 400 tons capacity, which would enable it to properly conduct the experiments. Meanwhile the subcommittees of the board have devoted their time to such experiments as could be made with the smaller testing machines already available. This large machine is just now completed and ready for erection at the Watertown Arsenal, and the real labors of the board are therefore just about to be commenced. If the board is to be discontinued at the end of the present fiscal year, the money already appropriated and the services of the gentlemen who have given so much time to the subject will be unproductive of any results. The importance of these experiments can hardly be overestimated when we consider the almost endless variety of purposes for which iron and steel are employed in this country and the many thousands of lives which daily depend on the soundness of iron structures. I need hardly refer to the recent disaster at the Ashtabula bridge, in Ohio, and the conflicting theories of experts as to the cause of it, as an instance of what might have been averted by a more thorough knowledge of the properties of iron and the best modes of construction. These experiments can not properly be conducted by private firms, not only on account of the expense, but because the results must rest upon the authority of disinterested persons. They must therefore be undertaken under the sanction of the Government. Compared with their great value to the industrial interests of the country, the expense is very slight.
The board recommend an appropriation of $40,000 for the next fiscal year, and I earnestly commend their request to the favorable consideration of Congress. I also recommend that the board be required to conduct their investigations under the direction of the Secretary of War, and to make full report of their progress to that officer in time to be incorporated in his annual report.
U.S. GRANT.
WASHINGTON, _February 2, 1877_.
_To the Senate of the United States_:
I transmit, in answer to a resolution of the Senate of the 10th ultimo, a report of the Secretary of State, with its accompanying papers.[121]
U.S. GRANT.
[Footnote 121: Preliminary and final reports of J. Hubley Ashton, agent of the United States before the United States and Mexican Claims Commission.]
EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 3, 1877_.
_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:
By the act of Congress approved January 14, 1875, “to provide for the resumption of specie payments,” the 1st of January, 1879, is fixed as the date when such resumption is to begin. It may not be desirable to fix an earlier date when it shall actually become obligatory upon the Government to redeem its outstanding legal-tender notes in coin on presentation, but it is certainly most desirable, and will prove most beneficial to every pecuniary interest of the country, to hasten the day when the paper circulation of the country and the gold coin shall have equal values.
At a later day, if currency and coin should retain equal values, it might become advisable to authorize or direct resumption. I believe the time has come when by a simple act of the legislative branch of the Government this most desirable result can be attained. I am strengthened in this view by the course trade has taken in the last two years and by the strength of the credit of the United States at home and abroad.
For the fiscal year ending June 30, 1876, the exports of the United States exceeded the imports by $120,213,102; but our exports include $40,569,621 of specie and bullion in excess of imports of the same commodities. For the six months of the present fiscal year from July 1, 1876, to January 1, 1877, the excess of exports over imports amounted to $107,544,869, and the import of specie and bullion exceeded the export of the precious metals by $6,192,147 in the same time. The actual excess of exports over imports for the six months, exclusive of specie and bullion, amounted to $113,737,040, showing for the time being the accumulation of specie and bullion in the country amounting to more than $6,000,000, in addition to the national product of these metals for the same period–a total increase of gold and silver for the six months not far short of $60,000,000. It is very evident that unless this great increase of the precious metals can be utilized at home in such a way as to make it in some manner remunerative to the holders it must seek a foreign market as surely as would any other product of the soil or the manufactory. Any legislation which will keep coin and bullion at home will, in my judgment, soon bring about practical resumption, and will add the coin of the country to the circulating medium, thus securing a healthy “inflation” of a sound currency, to the great advantage of every legitimate business interest.
The act to provide for the resumption of specie payments authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to issue bonds of either of the descriptions named in the act of Congress approved July 14, 1870, entitled “An act to authorize the refunding of the national debt,” for not less than par in gold. With the present value of the 4-1/2 per cent bonds in the markets of the world, they could be exchanged at par for gold, thus strengthening the Treasury to meet final resumption and to keep the excess of coin over demand, pending its permanent use as a circulating medium, at home. All that would be further required would be to reduce the volume of legal-tender notes in circulation. To accomplish this I would suggest an act authorizing the Secretary of the Treasury to issue 4 per cent bonds, with forty years to run before maturity, to be exchanged for legal-tender notes whenever presented in sums of $50 or any multiple thereof, the whole amount of such bonds, however, not to exceed $150,000,000. To increase the home demand for such bonds I would recommend that they be available for deposit in the United States Treasury for banking purposes under the various provisions of law relating to national banks.
I would suggest further that national banks be required to retain a certain percentage of the coin interest received by them from the bonds deposited with the Treasury to secure their circulation.
I would also recommend the repeal of the third section of the joint resolution “for the issue of silver coin,” approved July 22, 1876, limiting the subsidiary coin and fractional currency to $50,000,000.
I am satisfied that if Congress will enact some such law as will accomplish the end suggested they will give a relief to the country instant in its effects, and for which they will receive the gratitude of the whole people.
U.S. GRANT.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 9, 1877_.
_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:
The accompanying memorial is transmitted to Congress at the request of a committee, composed of many distinguished citizens of New York, recently appointed to cooperate with a generous body of French citizens who design to erect in the harbor of New York a colossal statue of “Liberty Enlightening the World.” Very little is asked of us to do, and I hope that the wishes of the memorialists may receive your very favorable consideration.
U.S. GRANT.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 9, 1877_.
_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:
I transmit herewith the catalogues and report of the board on behalf of the Executive Departments at the International Exhibition of 1876, with their accompanying illustrations.
The labors performed by the members of the board, as evinced by the voluminous mass of information found in the various papers from the officers charged with their preparation, have been in the highest degree commendable, and believing that the publication of these papers will form an interesting memorial of the greatest of international exhibitions and of the centennial anniversary of the independence of our country, I recommend that they be printed in a suitable form for distribution and preservation.
The letter of the chairman of the board will give to Congress the history of its organization, the law and Executive orders under which it has acted, and the steps which have been taken to preserve the large and instructive collections made, with a view to their forming a part of a national museum, should Congress make the necessary appropriations for such a desirable object.
U.S. GRANT.
WASHINGTON, _February 15, 1877_.
_To the Senate of the United States_:
I transmit herewith, in answer to the resolution of the Senate of the 13th instant, a report from the Secretary of State, with accompanying papers.[122]
U.S. GRANT.
[Footnote 122: Statements of appropriations and expenditures of the Department of State from March 4, 1789, to June 30, 1876, inclusive.]
WASHINGTON, _February 23, 1877_.
_To the Senate and House of Representatives_:
I transmit herewith a report from the Secretary of State, bearing date the 20th instant, with its accompaniments, being the report of the commissioner of the United States and of the officers of engineers attached to the commission appointed to determine the boundary line between the United States and the possessions of Great Britain from the northwest angle of the Lake of the Woods to the summit of the Rocky Mountains. These reports announce the completion of the labors of this commission, whereby the entire boundary line between the United States and the possessions of Great Britain is marked and determined, except as to that part of the territory of the United States which was ceded by Russia under the treaty of 1867.
U.S. GRANT.
WASHINGTON, _February 24, 1877_.
_To the House of Representatives_:
I transmit herewith, in answer to the resolution of the House of Representatives of the 25th ultimo, a report from the Secretary of State, with accompanying papers.[123]
U.S. GRANT.
[Footnote 123: Correspondence, etc., connected with the agency of A.B. Steinberger in the Samoan Islands.]
EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 26, 1877_.
_To the Senate of the United States_:
I have the honor to return herewith Senate bill No. 234, entitled “An act to allow a pension of $37 per month to soldiers who have lost both an arm and a leg.” Under existing law soldiers who have lost both an arm and a leg are entitled to draw a monthly pension of $18. As the object of this bill is to allow them $18 per month for each of these disabilities, or $36 in all, it is returned simply for an amendment of title which shall agree with its provisions. When this shall have been done, I will very gladly give it my immediate approval.
U.S. GRANT.
WASHINGTON, _February 28, 1877_.
_To the Senate of the United States_:
In answer to the resolution[124] of the Senate of the 27th instant, I transmit herewith a report of the Secretary of State, together with the papers which accompanied it.
U.S. GRANT.
[Footnote 124: Directing the Secretary of State to transmit any communication demanding the payment of moneys claimed to be due the Dominican Government from the United States.]
VETO MESSAGES.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 15, 1877_.
_To the House of Representatives_:
For the reasons set forth in the accompanying communication addressed to the Secretary of the Interior by the Commissioner of the General Land Office, I have the honor to return herewith without my signature the bill (H.R. 2041) entitled “An act to amend section 2291 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, in relation to proof required in homestead entries.”
U.S. GRANT.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, _Washington, D.C., January 12, 1877_.
The PRESIDENT.
SIR: I have the honor to return herewith enrolled bill H.R. No. 2041, entitled “An act to amend section 2291 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, in relation to proof required in homestead entries,” which accompanied your letter of the 10th instant, requesting to be informed whether any objection was known to this Department why the same should not become a law.
The matter was referred to the Commissioner of the General Land Office, and I transmit herewith a copy of a letter from him suggesting certain amendments to the second section of said act.
I concur in the recommendations made by the Commissioner.
I have the honor to be, with great respect, your obedient servant,
Z. CHANDLER, _Secretary_.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
GENERAL LAND OFFICE,
_Washington, D.C., January 11, 1877_.
The HONORABLE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR.
SIR: I am in receipt, by your reference of yesterday’s date, of “An act to amend section 2291 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, in relation to proof required in homestead entries,” which has passed both Houses of Congress and now awaits the signature of the President.
The purpose of the act is to enable parties seeking title under the homestead law to make final proof before a judge or clerk of court in the county or district where the lands are situated.
Its provisions are in conformity with the views and recommendations of this office, and I see no objection to them in so far as relates to the taking of the testimony.
I observe, however, that the second section provides that the proofs, affidavits, and oaths shall be filed in the office of the register, and no provision is made for the transmission of either the original papers or duplicates to this office, in order that patents may properly issue thereon, the provisions relating to certification for the purposes of evidence seeming to require that they shall remain on file in the district office. There is, therefore, no opportunity for the supervisory control of the Commissioner over entries so made to be exercised under the statutes, and thus the express requirements of existing law, as well as the essential harmony of the land system, are interfered with by its provisions. To remedy this defect in the proposed law I recommend that the act be returned to the legislative body with the request for an enactment in lieu of the second section which shall provide for the regular transmission of the papers to this office, as in other cases, or the simple striking out of the section altogether, as the provisions of existing law would then cover the case, and require the same disposal of this class of entries as obtains under present regulations so far as relates to the transmission of papers and proof to this office and the certification of the same by the Commissioner, under seal, for purposes of evidence.
I observe in section 3, line 4, the omission of the word “he” after the word “corrupt,” which destroys the grammatical construction of the language and was probably a clerical error.
I return herewith the act referred to.
Very respectfully, your obedient servant,
A. WILLIAMSON, _Commissioner_.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 23, 1877_.
_To the House of Representatives_:
I return herewith House bill (No. 4350) to abolish the board of commissioners of the Metropolitan police of the District of Columbia and to transfer its duties to the Commissioners of the District of Columbia, without my approval.
It is my judgment that the police commissioners, while appointed by the Executive, should report to and receive instructions from the District Commissioners. Under other circumstances than those existing at present I would have no objection to the entire abolition of the board and seeing the duties devolved directly upon the District Commissioners. The latter should, in my opinion, have supervision and control over the acts of the police commissioners under any circumstances; but as recent events have shown that gross violations of law have existed in this District for years directly under the eyes of the police, it is highly desirable that the board of police commissioners should be continued in some form until the evil complained of is eradicated and until the police force is put on a footing to prevent, if possible, a recurrence of the evil. The board of police commissioners have recently been charged with the direct object of accomplishing this end.
U.S. GRANT.
WASHINGTON, _January 26, 1877_.
_To the House of Representatives_:
I return to the House of Representatives, in which they originated, two joint resolutions, the one entitled “Joint resolution relating to congratulations from the Argentine Republic,” the other entitled “Joint resolution in reference to congratulations from the Republic of Pretoria, South Africa.”
The former of these resolutions purports to direct the Secretary of State to acknowledge a dispatch of congratulation from the Argentine Republic and the high appreciation of Congress of the compliment thus conveyed. The other directs the Secretary of State to communicate to the Republic of Pretoria the high appreciation of Congress of the complimentary terms in which said Republic has referred to the first centennial of our national independence.
Sympathizing, as I do, in the spirit of courtesy and friendly recognition which has prompted the passage of these resolutions, I can not escape the conviction that their adoption has inadvertently involved the exercise of a power which infringes upon the constitutional rights of the Executive.
The usage of governments generally confines their correspondence and interchange of opinion and of sentiments of congratulation, as well as of discussion, to one certain established agency. To allow correspondence or interchange between states to be conducted by or with more than one such agency would necessarily lead to confusion, and possibly to contradictory presentation of views and to international complications.
The Constitution of the United States, following the established usage of nations, has indicated the President as the agent to represent the national sovereignty in its intercourse with foreign powers and to receive all official communications from them. It gives him the power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties and to appoint embassadors and other public ministers; it intrusts to him solely “to receive embassadors and other public ministers,” thus vesting in him the origination of negotiations and the reception and conduct of all correspondence with foreign states, making him, in the language of one of the most eminent writers on constitutional law, “the constitutional organ of communication with foreign states.”
No copy of the addresses which it is proposed to acknowledge is furnished. I have no knowledge of their tone, language, or purport. From the tenor of the two joint resolutions it is to be inferred that these communications are probably purely congratulatory. Friendly and kindly intentioned as they may be, the presentation by a foreign state of any communication to a branch of the Government not contemplated by the Constitution for the reception of communications from foreign states might, if allowed to pass without notice, become a precedent for the address by foreigners or by foreign states of communications of a different nature and with wicked designs.
If Congress can direct the correspondence of the Secretary of State with foreign governments, a case very different from that now under consideration might arise, when that officer might be directed to present to the same foreign government entirely different and antagonistic views or statements.
By the act of Congress establishing what is now the Department of State, then known as the Department of Foreign Affairs, the Secretary is to “perform and execute such duties as shall from time to time be enjoined on or intrusted to him by the President of the United States, agreeably to the Constitution, relative to correspondence, commissions, or instructions to or with public ministers or consuls from the United States, or to negotiations with public ministers from foreign states or princes, or to memorials or other applications from foreign public ministers or other foreigners, or to such other matters respecting foreign affairs as the President of the United States shall assign to the said Department; and furthermore, the said principal officer [the Secretary of State] shall conduct the business of the said Department in such manner as the President of the United States shall from time to time order or instruct.”
This law, which remains substantially unchanged, confirms the view that the whole correspondence of the Government with and from foreign states is intrusted to the President; that the Secretary of State conducts such correspondence exclusively under the orders and instructions of the President, and that no communication or correspondence from foreigners or from a foreign state can properly be addressed to any branch or Department of the Government except that to which such correspondence has been committed by the Constitution and the laws.
I therefore feel it my duty to return the joint resolutions without my approval to the House of Representatives, in which they originated.
In addition to the reasons already stated for withholding my constitutional approval from these resolutions is the fact that no information is furnished as to the terms or purport of the communications to which acknowledgments are desired; no copy of the communications accompanies the resolutions, nor is the name even of the officer or of the body to whom an acknowledgment could be addressed given; it is not known whether these congratulatory addresses proceed from the head of the state or from legislative bodies; and as regards the resolution relating to the Republic of Pretoria, I can not learn that any state or government of that name exists.
U.S. GRANT.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, _January 26, 1877_.
_To the Senate of the United States_:
I have the honor to return herewith without my approval Senate bill No. 685, entitled “An act to place the name of Daniel H. Kelly upon the muster roll of Company F, Second Tennessee Infantry.”
The reasons for withholding my signature to this bill may be found in the accompanying report received from the Secretary of War.
U.S. GRANT.
WAR DEPARTMENT, _January 24, 1877_.
The PRESIDENT.
SIR: I have the honor to return herewith Senate bill 685, “to place the name of Daniel H. Kelly upon the muster roll of Company F, Second Tennessee Infantry,” with the report of the Adjutant-General, as follows:
“The inclosed act directs the Secretary of War to place the name of Daniel H. Kelly upon the muster roll of Company F, Second Tennessee Infantry, to date December 1, 1861. There is no record of the enlistment, service, or death of this man on file in this office, and if this act becomes a law as it now reads it will be of no benefit to the heirs.”
I have the honor to be, sir, with great respect, your obedient servant,
J.D. CAMERON, _Secretary of War_.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 14, 1877_.
_To the House of Representatives_:
I have the honor to return herewith without my approval House bill No. 3367, entitled “An act to remove the charge of desertion from the military record of Alfred Rouland.”
The reasons for withholding my signature may be found in the accompanying report received from the Secretary of War.
U.S. GRANT.
WAR DEPARTMENT, _Washington City, February 8, 1877_.
The PRESIDENT.
SIR: I have the honor to return House bill 3367, “to remove the charge of desertion from the military record of Alfred Rouland,” and inclose copy of the report of the Adjutant-General, dated the 8th instant, who recommends that the bill be not approved.
In this connection I would invite attention to reports of the Military Committees of the House and Senate (House Report No. 461, Forty-fourth Congress, first session; Senate Report No. 578, Forty-fourth Congress, second session) in the case, of which copies are herewith.
I have the honor to be, very respectfully, your obedient servant,
J.D. CAMERON, _Secretary of War_.
WAR DEPARTMENT,
ADJUTANT-GENERAL’S OFFICE,
_February 8, 1877_.
Respectfully returned to the Secretary of War.
This man is reported on the muster-out roll of his company as having “deserted at Wilmington, N.C., April 16, 1866.”
In his petition of December 28, 1874, on file in this office, occurs the following language:
“I was transferred to the Twenty-eighth Michigan Volunteers, and performed duty with that regiment from the 28th June, 1865, until the 16th day of April, 1866, when, being in a reduced and weak condition from continued chills and fever, and being in great fear of smallpox, which had become very prevalent at Wilmington, N.C., where my company was then stationed, I left my command without leave and returned to Michigan.” * * *
This man is consequently a deserter in fact, and should this bill, restoring to an honorable status an admitted deserter, become a law, it will defeat every end of military discipline and justice, besides working a great injustice to every soldier who served faithfully and honorably.
It is therefore strongly recommended that it be not approved.
E.D. TOWNSEND, _Adjutant-General_.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 14, 1877_.
_To the House of Representatives_:
I return the House bill No. 3155, entitled “An act to perfect the revision of the statutes of the United States,” without my approval. My objection is to the single provision which amends section 3823 of the Revised Statutes.
That section is as follows:
SEC. 3823. The Clerk of the House of Representatives shall select in Virginia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas, and Arkansas one or more newspapers, not exceeding the number allowed by law, in which such treaties and laws of the United States as may be ordered for publication in newspapers according to law shall be published, and in some one or more of which so selected all such advertisements as may be ordered for publication in said districts by any United States court or judge thereof, or by any officer of such courts, or by any executive officer of the United States, shall be published, the compensation for which and other terms of publication shall be fixed by said Clerk at a rate not exceeding $2 per page for the publication of treaties and laws, and not exceeding $1 per square of eight lines of space for the publication of advertisements, the accounts for which shall be adjusted by the proper accounting officers and paid in the manner now authorized by law in the like cases.
The bill proposes to amend this section as follows:
By striking out all after the word “in” in the first line to the word “one” in the third line, and inserting therefor the words “each State and Territory of the United States.”
Prior to 1867 the advertising of the Executive Departments had been subject to the direction of the heads of those Departments, and had been published in newspapers selected by them and on terms fixed by them. In the year 1867 (14 U.S. Statutes at Large, pp. 466, 467), while the ten States above named were yet unrestricted, and when there existed a radical difference of opinion between the executive and legislative departments as to the administration of the Government in those States, this provision was enacted. Subsequently, during the same year (15 U.S. Statutes at Large, p. 8), so much of this provision “as relates to the publication of the laws and treaties of the United States” was extended to all the States and Territories, leaving the advertisements ordered by Congress and by the Executive Departments unaffected thereby. The continuance of this provision after the reconstruction acts had taken effect and the bringing it forward into the Revised Statutes were probably through inadvertence.
The existence of this section (3823) of the Revised Statutes seems to have been ignored by Congress itself in the adoption of section 3941, authorizing the Postmaster-General to advertise in such newspapers as he may choose. But the present act, if it should go into effect, would compel him and the other heads of the Executive Departments, as well as all the courts, to publish all their advertisements in newspapers selected by the Clerk of the House of Representatives. It would make general in its operation a provision which, was exceptional and temporary in its origin and character. This, in my judgment, would be unwise, if not also an actual encroachment upon the constitutional rights of the executive branch of the Government. The person who should be appointed by law to select all the newspapers throughout the country to which the patronage of all branches of the Government of the United States should be given, if not an officer of the United States under Article II, section 2, clause 2, of the Constitution, would certainly have powers and duties which have hitherto been regarded as official.
But without reference to the question of its constitutionality, I am satisfied that this provision would not operate usefully or fairly. I am constrained, therefore, to withhold from it my approval. I regret that my objection to this one clause of the act can not be made available without withholding my approval from the entire act, which is otherwise unobjectionable.
U.S. GRANT.
EXECUTIVE MANSION, _February 28, 1877_.
_To the Senate of the United States_:
I have the honor to return herewith without my approval Senate bill No. 691, entitled “An act for the relief of Edward A. Leland.” The reasons for withholding my approval may be found in the accompanying communication received from the Secretary of the Interior.
U.S. GRANT.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, _Washington, February 27, 1877_.
The PRESIDENT.
SIR: I have the honor to return herewith the bill (S. 691) entitled “An act for the relief of Edward A. Leland,” accompanied by a copy of a letter from the Commissioner of Patents suggesting an objection to the bill in its present form, and to recommend that it be returned to Congress for amendment in accordance with the suggestions of the Commissioner.
I have the honor to be, very respectfully,
Z. CHANDLER, _Secretary_.
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
UNITED STATES PATENT OFFICE,
_Washington, D.C., February 27, 1877_.
Hon. Z. CHANDLER,
_Secretary of the Interior_.
SIR: In the matter of the enrolled bill (S. 691) extending letters patent of Edward A. Leland, I have the honor to report that said letters patent were granted for an improved paint can August 14, 1860, for the term of fourteen years; that they consequently expired on the 14th day of August, 1874, whereupon the invention became the property of the public.
The present act proposes to extend the term of the patent seven years from said 14th day of August, 1874, and give to it the same effect in law as if it had been originally granted for the term of twenty-one years.
It will be seen, therefore, that those who have innocently used and purchased the invention since the expiration of the letters patent on the 14th of August, 1874, under the impression that the invention was the property of the public, will, by the retroactive terms of the bill, be liable for damages for such use upon suits for infringement.
This hardship is generally, if not always, provided against by a proviso to such bills, setting forth in terms “that no person shall be held liable for the infringement of said patent, if extended, for making use of said invention since the expiration of the original term of said patent and prior to the date of its extension.”
Unless such a proviso is incorporated into the present bill, the injustice alluded to may be done.
Very respectfully, your obedient servant,
ELLIS SPEAR, _Commissioner of Patents_.
PROCLAMATION.
BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
A PROCLAMATION.
Whereas objects of interest to the United States require that the Senate should be convened at 12 o’clock on the 5th day of March next to receive and act upon such communications as may be made to it on the part of the Executive:
Now, therefore, I, Ulysses S. Grant, President of the United States, have considered it to be my duty to issue this my proclamation, declaring that an extraordinary occasion requires the Senate of the United States to convene for the transaction of business at the Capitol, in the city of Washington, on the 5th day of March next, at 12 o’clock at noon on that day, of which all who shall at that time be entitled to act as members of that body are hereby required to take notice.
[SEAL.]
Given under my hand and the seal of the United States, at Washington, the 2d day of March, A.D. 1877, and of the Independence of the United States of America the one hundred and first.
U.S. GRANT.
By the President:
HAMILTON FISH,
_Secretary of State_.