SPECIAL MESSAGE. JUNE 16, 1846. To the Senate of the United States : In answer to the resolution of the senate of the 3d instant, I communicate, herewith, estimates prepared by the war and navy departments, of the probable expenses of conducting the existing war with Mexico, during the remainder of the present and the whole of the next fiscal year. I communicate also a report of the secretary of the treasury, based upon these estimates, containing recommendations of measures for raising the additional means required. It is probable that the actual expenses incurred during the period specified may fall considerably below the estimates. submitted, which are for a larger number of troops than have yet been called to the field. As a precautionary measure, however, against any possible deficiency, the estimates have been made at the largest amount which any state of the service may require. It will be perceived from the report of the secretary of the treasury that a considerable portion of the additional amount required may be raised by a modification of the rates of duty imposed by the existing tariff laws. The high duties at present levied on many articles totally exclude them from importation, while the quantity and amount of others which are imported are greatly diminished. By reducing these duties to a revenue standard, it is not doubted that a large amount of the articles on which they are imposed would be imported, and a corresponding amount of revenue be received at the treasury from this source. By imposing revenue duties on many articles now permitted to be imported free of duty, and by regulating the rates within the revenue standard upon others, a large additional revenue will be collected. Independently of the high considerations which induced me, in my annual message, to recommend a modification and reduction of the rates of duty imposed by the act of 1842 as being not only proper in reference to a state of peace, but just to all the great interests of the country, the necessity of such modification and reduction as a war measure must now be manifest. The country requires additional revenue for the prosecution of the war. It may be obtained, to a great extent, by reducing the prohibitory and highly protective duties imposed by the existing laws to revenue rates; by imposing revenue duties on the free list; and by modifying the rates of duty on other articles. The modifications recommended by the secretary of the treasury in his annual report in December last were adapted to a state of peace, and the additional duties now suggested by him are with a view strictly to raise revenue as a war measure. At the conclusion of the war these duties may and should be abolished, and reduced to lower rates. It is not apprehended that the existing war with Mexico will materially affect our trade and commerce with the rest of the world. On the contrary, the reductions proposed would increase that trade, and augment the revenue derived from it. When the country is in a state of war, no contingency should be permitted to occur in which there would be a deficiency in the treasury for the vigorous prosecution of the war; and, to guard against such an event, it is recommended, that contingent authority be given to issue treasury notes, or to contract a loan for a limited amount, reimbursable at an early day. Should no occasion arise to exercise the power, still it may be important that the authority should exist should there be a necessity for it. It is not deemed necessary to resort to direct taxes or excises, the measures recommended being deemed preferable as a means of increasing the revenue. It is hoped that the war with Mexico, if vigorously prosecuted, as is contemplated, may be of short duration. I shall be at all times ready to conclude an honorable peace, whenever the Mexican government shall manifest a like disposition. The existing war has been rendered necessary by the acts of Mexico, and whenever that power shall be ready to do us justice, we shall be prepared to sheath the sword and tender the olive-branch of peace. SPECIAL MESSAGE. JUNE 16, 1846. To the Senate of the United States :— In accordance with the resolution of the senate of the 12th instant, that 'the president of the United States be, and he is hereby, advised to accept the proposal of the British government, accompanying his message to the senate dated 10th June, 1846, for a convention to settle boundaries, &c., between the United States and Great Britain west of the Rocky or Stony mountains," a convention was concluded and signed on the 15th instant, by the secretary of state on the part of the United States, and the envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary of her Britannic majesty on the part of Great Britain. This convention I now lay before the senate for their consideration, with a view to its ratification. To the House of Representatives of the United States: I COMMUNICATE herewith a report from the secretary of the navy, accompanied with the correspondence called for by the resolution of the house of representatives of the 4th of May last, between Commander G. I. Pendergrast, and the governments on the Rio de la Plata, and the foreign naval commanders and the United States minister at Buenos Ayres and the navy department, while or since said Pendergrast was in command of the United States ship Boston, in the Rio de la Plata, touching said service. SPECIAL MESSAGE. JULY 2, 1846. To the House of Representatives : I TRANSMIT herewith a report from the secretary of state, together witn copies of the correspondence in the year 1841, between the president of the United States and the governor of New York, relative to the appearance of Joshua A. Spencer, Esq., district attorney of the United States for the western district of New York, in the courts of the state of New York, as council for Alexander M'Leod, called for by the resolution of the house of representatives of the 10th of April, 1846. SPECIAL MESSAGE. JULY 9, 1846. To the Senate of the United States :— 66 I COMMUNICATE herewith a report from the secretary of the treasury, transmitting a report from the commissioner of public lands, in reply to the resolution of the senate of the 22d of June, 1846, calling for information of the "progress which has been made in the surveys of the mineral region upon Lake Superior, and within what time such surveys may probably be prepared for the sales of the lands in that country." In answer to that portion of the resolution which calls for the views" of the executive "respecting the proper mode of disposing of said lands, keeping in view the interest of the United States, and the equitable claims of individuals who, under the authority of the War Department, have made improvements thereon, or acquired rights of possession," I recommend that these lands be brought in market and sold at such price and under such regulations as Congress may prescribe, and that the right of pre-emption be secured to such persons as have, under the authority of the War Department, made improvements or acquired rights of possession thereon. Should Congress deem it proper to authorize the sale of these lands, it will be necessary to attach them to suitable land districts, and that they be placed under the management and control of the general land office, as other public lands. SPECIAL MESSAGE. JULY 21, 1846. To the Senate of the United States : I HEREWITH transmit, in compliance with the request of the senate in their resolution of the 17th of June, 1846, a report of the secretary of state, together with a copy of all "the despatches and instructions" "relative to the Oregon treaty, ""forwarded to our minister, Mr. M'Lane, not 99 66 heretofore communicated to the senate," including a statement of the propositions for the adjustment of the Oregon question previously made and rejected by the respective governments. This statement was furnished to Mr. M.Lane before his departure from the country, and is dated on the 12th July, 1845, the day on which the note was addressed by the secretary of state to Mr. Pakenham, offering to settle the controversy by the 49th parallel of latitude, which was rejected by that minister on the 29th July following. The Senate will perceive that extracts from but two of Mr. M'Lane's despatches and communications to this government" are transmitted; and these only because they were necessary to explain the answers given to them by the secretary of state. These despatches are both numerous and voluminous; and, from their confidential character, their publication, it is believed, would be highly prejudical to the public interests. Public considerations alone have induced me to withhold the despatches of Mr. M'Lane addressed to the secretary of state. I concur with the secretary of state in the views presented in his report, herewith transmitted against the publication of these despatches. Mr. M'Lane has performed his whole duty to his country; and I am not only willing, but anxious, that every senator who may desire it, shall have an opportunity of perusing these despatches at the department of state. The secretary of state has been instructed to afford every facility for this purpose. RIVER AND HARBOR VETO. AUGUST 3, 1846. To the House of Representatives : I HAVE Considered the bill entitled "An act making appropriations for the improvement of certain harbors and rivers," with the care which its importance demands, and now return the same to the house of representatives, in which it originated, with my objections to its becoming a law. The bill proposes to appropriate one million three hundred and seventyeight thousand four hundred and fifty dollars, to be applied to more than forty distinct and separate objects of improvement. On examining its pro visions, and the variety of objects of improvement which it embraces, many of them of a local character, it is difficult to conceive, if it shall be sanctioned and become a law, what practical constitutional restraint can hereafter be imposed upon the most extended system of internal improvements by the federal government in all parts of the Union. The constitution has not, in my judgment, conferred upon the federal government the power to construct works of internal improvement within the states, or to appropri ate money from the treasury for that purpose. That this bill assumes for the federal government the right to exercise this power, can not, I think, be doubted. The approved course of the government, and the deliberatelyexpressed judgment of the people, have denied the existence of such a power under the constitution. Several of my predecessors have denied its existence in the most solemn forms. The general proposition that the federal government does not possess this power is so well settled, and has for a considerable period been so generally acquiesced in, that it is not deemed necessary to reiterate the arguments by which it is sustained. Nor do I deem it necessary, after the full and elaborate discussions which have taken place before the country on this subject, to do more than state the general considerations which have satisfied me of the unconstitutionality and inexpediency of the exercise of such a power. It is not questioned that the federal government is one of limited powers. Its powers are such, and such only, as are expressly granted in the constitution, or are properly incident to the expressly granted powers, and necessary to their execution. In determining whether a given power has been granted, a sound rule of construction has been laid down by Mr. Madison. That rule is, that "whenever a question arises concerning a particular power, the first question is whether the power be expressed in the constitution. If it be, the question is decided. If it be not expressed, the next inquiry must be, whether it is properly an incident to an expressed power, and necessary to its execution. If it be, it may be exercised by Congress. If it be not, Congress can not exercise it." It is not pretended that there is any express grant in the constitution conferring on Congress the power in question. Is it, then, an incidental power, necessary and proper for the execution of any of the granted powers? All the granted powers, it is confidently affirmed, may be effectually executed without the aid of such an incident. "A power to be incidental must not be exercised for ends which make it a principal, or substantive power, independent of the principal power to which it is an incident." It is not enough that it may be regarded by Congress as convenient, or that its exercise would advance the public weal. It must be necessary and proper to the execution of the principal expressed power to which it is an incident, and without which such principal power can not be carried into effect. The whole frame of the federal constitution proves that the government which it creates was intended to be one of limited and specified powers. A construction of the constitution so broad as that by which the power in question is defended, tends imperceptibly to a consolidation of power in a government intended by its framers to be thus limited in its authority. "The obvious tendency and inevitable result of a consolidation of the states into one sovereignty, would be to transform the republican system of the United States into a monarchy." To guard against the assumption of all powers which encroach upon the reserved sovereignty of the states, and which consequently tend to consolidation, is the duty of all the true friends of our political system. That the power in question is not properly an incident to any of the granted powers, I am fully satisfied; but if there were doubts on this subject, experience has demonstrated the wisdom of the rule that all the functionaries of the federal government should abstain from the exercise of all questionable or doubtful powers. If an enlargement of the powers of the federal government should be deemed proper, it is safer and wiser to appeal to the states and the people in the mode prescribed by the constitution for the grant desired, than to assume its exercise without an amendment of the constitution. If Congress does not possess the general power to construct works of internal improvement within the states, or to appropriate money from the treasury for that purpose, what is there to exempt some, at least, of the objects of appropriation included in this bill from the operation of the general rule? This bill assumes the existence of the power, and in some of its provisions asserts the principle, that Con |
