BY S. B. HOW. CLEARFIELD, PA., WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 10, 1857. VOL. 4.-JTO. 17. FIRST ANNUAL .MESSAGE OF JAMES BUCHANAN. delivered on Tuegicy, lee. 3, 1357. h'tllow-Citiztns of the Setiatt and House of Rep reseulativtt : In obedience to (lie command of the consti tution, it has now become my duty "to give to Congress information ot the State of the Union, and lecotnuiend to their consideration audi measures" as I judge to bo "necessary und ex pedient." But first, and above all, our thanks are doe to Almighty God for the numerous benefits which lie has bestowed upon this people; and our united prayers ought to ascend to Him that lie would continue to bless ourgreat Republic in time to come, as lie blessed it in time past. Since the adjournment of the last Congress uur constituents have enjoyed au unusual de gree of health. The earth has yielded her iruits abundantly, ;:ud lias. bountifully rewar ded tho toil of the husbandman. Our great tuples have commanded high prices,, and, up till within a brief period, our manufacturing, mineral, and mccii.Uiical occupations . have largely partaken of tho general prosperity. TTe have possessed all the elements of mate rial wealth in rich abundance.nnd yet, notwith standing all these advantages, our country, in Its monctaiy interests, is at the present mo ment in a deplorable couduion. In the midst of unsurpassed plenty in all the productions of agriculture and in all the elements of nation al wealth, we liud our manufactures suspended, o;ir public works retarded, our private enter prises of di He re lit kinds abandoned, and thou sands of useful laborers thrown out ot em ployment and reduced to want. The revenue vf the government, which is chiefly derived from duties on imports from abroad, has been greatly reduced, whilst the appropriations made by Congress at its last session for the current liscal year are very large in amount. Under these circumstances a loan may be required before the close of tho present session, but this, although deeply to be regretted, would prove to be only a slight misfortune when compared with the suffering and distress prevailing among the people. With this the government cannot fail deeply to sympathize, though it way be without ti.e power to extend ielief. It is our duty to inquire what has produced euch unfortunate results, and whether their recurrence can be prevented? In all former f evulsions the blame might have been fairly uttributedto a variety ot co-operating causes ; lut not so upon the present occasion. It is tppjtcnt that our existing misfortunes have I roceeded solely from our extravagant and vicious system of paper currency ai.d bank, credits, exciting the people to wild speculation end gambling in stocks. These revulsions must coutiuuo to recur at successive intervals, bj long as the amour.t of paper currency and bank loans and discounts of the country shall be left to the discretion of fourteen hundred irresponsible banking institutions, which from the very law of tl.eir nature will consult the in terest of thoirstoek-hjklers rather than the pub lic welfare. The fra tilers of tho Constitution, when they gave to Congress the power '-to coin money nd regulate the value thereof," and prohibi ted the States trom coining money, emitting tills of credit, or making anything hut gold i.nd silver coin a tender in payment of debts, supposed they had protected the people against tho evils of an excessive ar.d irrodeemablj piper currency. Thevars not responsible for the existing anomaly that a government endowed with the sovereign attribute of coining money and regulating the val'.:e thereof, should have no power to prevent others from driving this coin cut ot the country and filling tip the channels of circulation with paper, which does not represent gold and silver. Jt is one of the highest ar.d most responsi ble duties of government to insure to the peo ple a sound circulating medium, the amount of which ought to be adapted with the utmost possible wisdom and skill to the wants of in ternal trade and foreign exchanges. If this be cither greatly above or greatly below the proper standard," the marketable value of eve ry man's ptoperty is increased or diminished In the same proportion, and justice to individ uals, as well as incalculable evils to the com munity, are the consequence. Unfortunately, under the construction of the federal constitution, which has now prevailed too long to be changed, this important and del icate duty has been dissevered from the coin ing power, and virtually transferred to more than fourteen hundred State banks, acting in dependently of each other.and regulating their paper issues almost exclusively by a regard to the present interest of their stockholders. Ex orcising the sovereign power of providing a paper currency, instead of coin, for the coun try, the first duty which these banks owe to the public is to keep in their vaults a sufficient a inount of gold and silver to insure, theconver tibilitv of their notes into coin at all times and under all circumstances. No bank ought ever to bo chartered without such restrictions on its All other j v.iisiTie'i as to secure this result. restrictions are comparatively vain. This is the onlv true touchstone,thc only efficient reg ulator of a J ia per currency the only one which can guard tho public against over-issues and bank suspensions. As a collateral and even tual security, it is doubtless wise, and in all cases ought to be required, that banks shall hold an amount of United States or State se curities equal to their notes in circulation and pledged for their redemption. This, however, fur.ifshes no adequate security against over issues. On the contrary, it may be perverted to inflate the currency. Indeed, it is possible bv this means to convert all the debts of the Uniicfl States and State governments into Unk notes.without reference to tli- specie re quired to redeem them. However valuable these securities may be in themselves, the) cannot be converted into gold and silver at the tn,T,t .. ..wKMire. as our experience teacnr cs, in sufficient time to prevent bank suspen sions and the depreciation of bank notes, in Ensland, which is to a considerable extent a paper-money country, though vastly behind our own in this respect, it was deemed ad is.i ble, anterior to the act of Parliament ot 16 which wisely sepented the issue of notes from the banking department, for the Bank of Lng land always to keep on hand gold and silver e qual to one-third of its combined circulation and deposits. II this proportion was no more than sufficient to secure the convertability of Its notes, with the whole of Great Britain, and to some extent the Continent of Europe, as a field for its circnlation, rendering it almost im possible that a sudden and immediate run to a dangerous amount should be made npon it,tho same proportion would cert inly be sufficient i under our banking system. Each ol our four teen hundred banks has but a limited circum ference for its circulation, and in the course of a very few days the depositors and note-holders might demand from such a bank a sufficient amount in specie to compel it to suspend,even although it had coin in its vaults equal to one third of its immediate liabilities. And yet I am not aware, with the exception of tho banks of Louisiana, that any State bank throughout the Union has been required by its charter to keep this or any other proportion of gold and silver compared with tho amount of its combined circulation and depositcs. What has been the consequence ? In a recent re port made by the Treasury Department on the condition of the banks throughout the differ ent States, according to rcturrs dated nearest January, 18-57, the aggregate amount of spe cie in their vaults is $08,849,838 ; ot their cir culation $21 4,778.822, aud of their depositcs 5230 .351,352. Thus it appears that these banks in the aggregate have considerably less than one dollar in seven of gold and silver compared with their circulation and deposits. It was palpable, therefore, that the very lirst pressure must drive them to suspension, aud deprive the people of a convertible currency, with ail its disastrous consequences. It is truly wonderful that they should have so long continued to preserve their credit, when a de mand for the payment of one-seventh of their immediate liabilities would have driven them into insolvency. And this is the condition of the banks, notwithstandihg that four hundred millions of gold from California have flowed in upon us within the last eight years, and the tide still continues to flow. Indeed, such has been the extravagance of hank credits, that the banks now hold a considerable less amount of sjccie, cither in proportion to the amount of their capital or to their circulation and de positcs combined, than they did before the discovery of gold in California. Whilst in the year 181S their specie in proportion to their capital was more than equal to one dol laa for four and a half, in 1857 it does not a liicuut to one dollar for every six dollars and thirty-three cents of their capital. In the year 18 13 the specie was equal within a very sr.i.dl fraction to one dollar in five of their cir culation and depositcs ; in 1807 it is not equal to one dollar in seven aud a half of their cir culation and depoiites. From this statement it is easy to account for our financial history for the last forty years. It has been a history of extravagant expansions in the business of the country, followed by ru inous contractions. At successive intervals the lest and most enterprising men have been tempted to their rnin by excessive bank loans of more paper credit, exciting them to extrav agant importations of foreign good, wild spec ulations, and ruinous and demoralizing stocK gambling. When the crisis arrives, as arrive it must, the banks can extend no relief to the people. In a vain struggle to redeem their li abilities ia specie, they are compelled to con tract their loans and their issues ; and at last, in the hour of distress, when their assistance is most needed, they and their debtors togeth er sink into insolvency. It is this paper sys tem of extravagant expansion, raising the nom inal price of every article far beyond its real value, when compared with the cost of similar articles in countries whose circulation is wise ly regulated, which has prevented us from c .mpeting in our own markets with foreign m anufacturers, has produced extravagant im portations, and has counteracted the effect of the large incidental ptotection afforded to our domestic manufactures by the present, revenue tariff. But for this the branches of our manu factures composed of raw materials, the pro ductions of our own country such as cotton, iron, and woollen fabrics would not only have acquired almost exclusive possession of the home market, but would have created for them selves a foreign market throughout the world. Deplorable, however, as may be onr present financial condition, we may yet indulge in bright hopes for the future. No other nation has ever existed which could have endured such violent expansions and contractions of paper credits without lasting injury; yet the buoyancy of youth, the enctgit s of our popu lation, and the spirit which never quails be fore difficulties, will enable us soon to recover from our present financial embarrassment, and may even occasion us speedily to forget tho k'sson which they have taught. In the mean time it is the duty of the gov ernment, by all proper means within its power, to aid in alleviating the sufferings of the peo ple, occasioned by the suspension of the banks, and to provide against a recurrence of the same calamity. Unfortunately, in either aspect of the case, it can do but little. Thanks to the independent treasury, the government has not suspended paymcnt,"as it was compelled to do by the failure of the banks in bo7. It will continue to discharge its liabilities to the peo ple in gold and silver. Its disbursements in coin will pass into circulation, and materially assist in restoring a sound currency. From its hiih credit, should we be compelled to make a temporary loan, it can be affected ou ! - 1 ...... ......iu ' I 1 1 c luiivnviir cn;IM II possible, he avoided ; but, if not, then the a inount shall be limited to the lowest practica ble sum. I have, therefore, determined that whilst no useful government works already in progress shall be suspended, new works, not already commenced, will be postponed, if this can be done without injury to the country. Those necessatv for its defence shall ploceed as tho there hud been no crisis in our monetary af fairs. But fhe federal government cannot do much to provide against a recurrence of eiisting ..vils. Kven if insurmountable constitutional objections did not exist against the creation of a National Bank, this would furnish no ade quate preventive security. The history of the last Bank of the United States abundantly proves the truth of this assertion. Such a bank could not. if it would, regulate the issues and credits of fourteen hundred State banks in such a manner as to prevent the ruinous expansions and contractions in our enrrency which afflicted the country throughout the ex istence of the late bank, or secure us against future suspensions. In 1825 art effort was S.de bv the Bank of England to curtail the issues of the country banks under the most favorable circumstances. The paper currency .,. i..,.n .Ti,.mdcd to a ruinous extent, and UUU ovt" ' 1 he Bank put forth all its power to contract in , J.a. r,M and restore tho equili- It accord brilim Ol UIO '. rfimnt ,.f inely commenced a system v Sloans and issues, in the n t .ope . tbat th. joint-stock and private imm. - " would be compelled to follow its example. It found, however, that as it contracted they ex panded, and at the end of the process, to em ploy the language of a very high official au thority, "whatever reduction of the paper cir culation was effected by the Bank of England (in 182-5) was more than made up by the is sues of the country hanks." But a Bank of the United States would not, if it could, restrain the issues and loans of the State banks, because its duty as a regulator of the currency must often be in direct conflict with the immediate interest of its stockhold ers. If we expect one agent to restrain or control another, their interest must, at least in some degree, be antagonistic. But the direc tors of a bank of the Uni:ed States would feel the same interest and the same inclination with the directors of the State banks to expand the currency, to accommodate their favorites and friends with loans, and to declare large divi dends. Such has been our experience in re gard to the last bank. After all, we must mainly rely npon the pa triotism and wisdom of the States tor the pre vention and redress of the evil. If they will afford us a real specie basis for our paper cir culation by increasing the denomination of banknotes, first to twenty and afterwards to fifty dollars ; if they will require that the banks shall at all times keep on hand at least one dol lar of gold and silver for every three dollars of their circulation and deposits; and if they will provide by a self-executing enactment, which nothing can arrest, that the moment they suspend they shall go intj liquidation, I believe that such provisions, with a weekly publication by each banx of a statement of its condition, would go far to secure us against fu ture suspension of specie payments. Congress, in my opinion, possesses the pow er to pass a uniform bankrupt law, applicable to all banking institutions throughout the U nited States, and I strongly recommend its ex ercise. This would make it the irreversable orginic law of each bank's existence, that a susj ensioa of specie payments shall produce its civil death. The instinct of self preserva tion would then compel it to perform its duties in such a manner as to escape the penalty and preserve its life. The evistence of banks and the circnlation of bank paper are so identified with the habits of our people, that they cannot at this day be suddenly abolished without much immediate injury to the country. If we would confine them to their appropriate sphere, and prevent them from administering to the spirit of wild and reckless speculation by extravagant loans and issues, they might be continued with ad vantage to the public. But this I say, after much reflection, if ex perience shall prove it to be impossible to en joy the facilities which well regulated banks might afford, without at the same time suffer ing tho calamities which the excess of the banks have hitherto inflicted upon the country, it would then be far the lesser evil to deprive them altogether of the power to issue a paper currency andconflne them to the functions of banks of depositc and discount. Our relations with foreign governments are, upon the whole, in a satisfactory condition. The diplomatic difticuties which existed be tween the government of the United States and that of Great Britain at the adjournment of the last Congress have been happily termi nated by the appointment of a British minis ter to this country, who has been cordially re ceived. Whilst it is greatly to the interest, as I am convinced it is the sincere desire, of the gov ernment and people of the two countries to be on terms of intimate friendship with each other, it has leen our misfortune almost al ways to have had somo irritating, if not dan gerous, outstanding question with Great Bri tain. Since the origin of the government we have been employed in negotiating treaties with that power, and afterwards in discussing their true intent and meaning. In this respect, the convention of April 19, 18-50, commonly called the Clayton and Bulwer treaty, has been the most unfortunate of all ; because the two gov ernments place directly opposite and contra dictory constructions upon its first and most important article. While in the United States, we believed that this treaty would place both powers upon an exact equality by the stipula tion that neither will ever "ocupy, or fortify, or colonize, or assume or exercise any domin ion" over, any part of Central America, it is contended by the British government that the true construction of this language has left them in the rightful possession of all that portion of Central America which was in their occupancy at the date of the treaty ; in fact, that the treaty is a virtual recognition on the part ot the United Slates of the right of Great Britain, either as owner or protector, to the whole extensive coast of Central Amer ica, sweeping round from the Rio Hondo to the port and harbor of San Juan de Nicaragua, together with the r.djaccnt Bay Islands, except the comparatively small portion of this be tween the Sarstoon and Cape Honduras. Ac cording to their construction, tho treaty does no more than simply prohibit them from ex tending their possessions in Central America beyond the present limits. it is not too much to assert, that if in the United States the treaty had been considered susceptible of such a construction, it never would have been negotiated under the author ity of the President, nor would it have receiv ed the approbation of the Senate. The uni versal conviction in the United States was, that when our government consented to vio late its traditional and time-honored policy, and to stipulate with a foreign government never to occupy or acquire territory in the Central American portion of our own conti nent, the consideration for this sacrifice was that Great Britain should, in this respect at least, be placed in the same position with our selves. Whilst we have no right to doubt the sinceritv of the British government in their construction of the treaty, it is at the same time my deliberate conviction that this con struction is in opposition both to its letter and its spirit. Under the late administration negotiations were instituted between the two governments for the purposo, if possible, of removing these difficulties; and a treaty having this laudable object in view was signed at London on the 17th October, 1850, and was submitted by the President to the Senate on the following 10th of December. Whether this treaty, cither in its original or amended form, would have ac complished the object intended without giv ing birth to new and embarrassing complica tions between the two governments, may per haps bo well questioned. Certain it is, how ever, ft was rendered much less objectionable by the different amendments made to it by the Senate. The treaty, as amended, was ratified by me on the 12th March, 1857, and was trans mitted to London for ratification by the Brit ish government. That government expressed its willingness to concur in all the amendments made by the Senate, with the single exception of the clause relating to 11 n at an and the other islands in the bay of Honduras. The article in the original treaty, as submitted to the Sen ate, after reciting that these islands and their inhabitants "having been by a convention bearing date the 27th day of August, 1856, be tween her Britannic Majesty and the republic of Honduras, constituted and declared a free territory under the sovereignty of the said re public of Honduras," stipulated that"tNs two contracting parties do hereby mutually engage to recognize and respect in all future time the independence and rights of the said free terri tory as a part of the republic of Honduras." Upon an examination of this convention be tween Great Britain and Honduras of the 27th August, 1856, it was found that, whilst declar ing the Bay Islands to b "a free territory un der the sovereignty of the Republic of Hon duras," it deprived that republic of rights, without which its sovereignty over them could scarcely be said to exist. It divided them from the remainder of Honduras, and gave to their inhabitants a seperate government of their own, with legislative, execntive, and ju dicial officers elected by themselves. It de prived the government of Honduras of the taxing power in every form, and exempted the people of the Islands from the performance of hiilitary duty except for their own exclusive defence. It also prohibited that republic from erecting fortifications upon them for their pro tection thus leaving them open to invasion from any quarter ; and, finally, it provided "that slavery shalltiot at any time hereafter be permitted to exist therein." Had Honduras ratified this convention, she would have ratified the establishment of a State substantially independent within her own limits, and a State at all times subject to Brit ish influence and control. Moreover, had the United States ratified the treaty with Great Britain in its original form, we should have been bound "to recognise and respect in all future time" these stipulations to the prejudice of Honduras. Being in direct opposition to the spirit and meaning of the Clayton and Bul wer treaty as understood in the United States, the Senate rejected the entire clause, and sub stituted in its stead n simple recognition of the sovereign right of Honduras to these islands in the following language : "The two contract ing parties do hereby mutually engage to rec ognise and respect the islands of Kuatan, Bon aco, Utila, Barbaretta, Helena, and Morat, sit uate iu the Bay of Honduras, and off the coast of the republic of Honduras, as under the sovereignty aud as part of the said republic of Honduras." Great Britain rejected this amendment, as signing as the only reason, that the ratifica tions of tho convention of the 27th August, 185G, between her aud Honduras, had not been "exchanged, owing. to the hesitation of that government." Had this been done, it is stat ed that "her Majesty's government would have had little difficulty in agreeing to the modifi cation proposed by the Senate, which then would have had in effect the same signification as the original wording." Whether this would have been the effect ; whether the mere cir cumstances of the exchange of the ratifications of the British convention with Honduras prior in point of time to the ratification of our treaty with Great Britain would, "in effect," have had "the same significations as the original wording," and thus have nullified the amend ment ot the Senate, may well be doubted. It is, perhaps, fortunate that the question has never arisen. The British government, immediately after rejecting the treaty as amended, proposed to enter into a new treaty with the United States, similar in all respects to the treaty wbich they had just refused to ratify, if the United States would consent to add to the Senate's clear and unqualified recognition of the sovereignty of Honduras over the Bay Islands the following conditional stipulation: "Whenever and so soon as the republic of Honduras shall have concluded and ratified a treaty with Great Britain, by which Great Britain shall have ce ded, and the republic of Honduras shall have accepted, the said islands, subject to the pro visions and conditions contained in such treaty." This proposition was, of course, rejected. After the Senate had refused to recognise the British convention with Ilondmas of the 27th August, 185G, with full knowledge of its con tents, it was impossible for me, necessarily ig norant of "the provisions and conditions" which might be contained in a future conven tion between the same parties,to sanction them in advance. The fact is that when two nations like Great Britanandthe United States, mutually desir ous as they are, and I trust may ever be, of maintaining tho most friendly relations with each other, have unfortunately concluded a treaty which they understand in senses direct ly opposite, the wisest course is to abrogate such a treaty by mutual consent, and to com mence anew. Had this been done promptly, all difficulties in Central America would most probably ere this have been adjusted to the satisfaction of both parties. The time spent in discussing tho meaning of the Clayton and Bulwer treaty would have been devoted to this praiseworthy purpose, and the task would have been tho more easily accomplished because the interest of the two countries in Central America is identical, be ing confined to securing safe transits over all the routes across the Isthmus. Whilst entertaining these sentiments, I shall nevertheless not refuse to contribute to any reasonable adjustment of the Central A nierican questions which is not practically in consistent with the American interpretalon of the treaty. Overtures for this purpose have been recently made by tho British government in a friendly spirit which I cordially recipro cate ; but whether this renewed effort will re sult in success I am not yet prepared to ex press an opinion. A brief period will deter mine. . With France our ancient relations of friend ship still continue to exist. . The French gov ernment have in several recent instances which need not be enumerated, evinced a spirit of good will and kindness towards our country which I hartily reciprocate. It is, notwitstan ding, much to be regretted that two nations whose productions are of such a character as to invite ; the most extensive exchanges and freest commercial intercourse, bhonld contin ue to enforce ancient and obsolete rcstiiction? of trade against each other. Ourcommercial treaty with France is in this respect an excep tion from our treaties with all other commer cial nations. Its jealousy levies discriminat ing duties both on tonnage and on articles, the growth, produce, or manufacture of the one country, when arriving in vessels belonging to the other. More than forty years ago, on the 3d March, 1815, Congress passed an act offering to all na tions to admit their vessels laden with their national productions into the ports of the U nited States upon the same terms with our own vessels, provided they would reciprocate to us similar advantages. This act confined the reciprocity to the productions of the res pect ivqforcign nations who might enter into the proposed arrangement with the U. States. The act of May Hi, 1828, removed this restric tion, and offered a similar reciprocity to all such vessels without reference to the origin of their cargoes. Upon these principles, our commercial treaties and arrangements have been founded, except with France ; and let us hope that this exception may not long exist. Our relations with Russia remain, as they have ever been, on the most friendly footing. The present Emperor, as well as his predeces sors, have never failed, when the occasion of fered, to manifest their good will to our coun try ; and th6ir friendship has always been highly appreciated by the gevernment and people of the United States. With all other European governments, ex cept that of Spain, our relat ions are as peace ful as we could desire. I regret to say that no progress whatever has been made, since the adjournment of Congress, towards the settle ment ot any of the numerous claims of our ci tizens against the Spanish government. Be sides, the outrage committed on our flag by the Spanish war frigate Ferrol.u:a, on the high seas, off the coast of Cuba, in March, 1855, by firing into the Americal mail steamer El Dora do, and detaining and searching her, remains unacknowledged and unredressed. The geu eral tone and temper of the Spanish govern ment towards that of the United States are much to be regretted. Our present envoy ex traordinary and minister plenipotentiary to Madrid has asked to be recalled ; and it is my purpose to send out a new minister to Spain, with special instructions on all questions pen ding between the two governments, aud with a deleimination to have them speedily and ami cably adjusted, if this be possible. In the mean time, whenever our minister urges the just claims of our citizens on the notice of the Spanish government, he is met with the objec tion that Congress have never made the appro priation recommended by President Polk in his annual message of Dec. 1847, "to be paid to the Spanish government for the purpose of distribution among the claimants in the Amis tad case." A similar recommendation was made by mv immediate predecessor in his message of December, 1853 ; and entirely con curring with both in the opinion that this in demnity is justly due under the treaty with Spain of Oct. 27, 1705, I earnestly recommend such an appropriation to the favorable consid eration of Congress. A treaty of friendship and commerce was concluded at Constantinople on the ICth De cember, 1S56, between the Ucited States and Persia, the ratifications of which were ex changed at Constantinople on the 13th June, 1857, and the treaty was proclaimed by the President on the 18tb August, 1857. This treaty, it is believed, will prove beneficial to American commerce. The Shah has manifes ted an earnest disposition to cultivate friendly relations with our country, and has expressed a strong wish that we should be represented at Teheran, by a minister plenipotentiary ; ami I recommend that an appropriation be made for this purpose. Recent occurrences in China have been un favorable to a revision of the treaty with that empire of the 3d July, 1844, with a view to the security and extension of our commerce. The 24th article of this treaty stipulated for a revision of it, in case experience should prove this to be requisite, "iu which case the two governments will, at the expiration of twelve years from the date of said convention, treat amicably concerning the same, by means of suitable persons appointed to conduct such negotiations. -' These twelve yeais exj lred on the 3d July, 185l ; but l"ng before that period it was ascertiined that important changes in the treaty were necessary ; and tever.il fruit less attempts were made by the commissioner of the United States to effect these changes. Another effort was about to ba made for the same purpose by our commissioner, in con junction with thj ministers of England and France, but this was suspended by the occur rence ot hostilities in the Canton river be tween Great Britain and the Chinese Empire. These hostilities have necessarily interrupted the trade of all nations with Canton, which is now in a state of blockade, and have occasion ed a serious loss of life and property. Mean while the insurrection within the empire a gainst the existing imperial dynasty still con tinues, and it is difficult to anticipate what will be the result. Under these circumstances, I have deemed it advisable to appoint a distinguished citizen of Pennsylvania envoy extraordinary and min ister plenipoten tiary to proceed to China, aud avail himself of any opjortunities which may offer to effect changes in the existing trea ty favorable to America commerce. He left the United States for the placo of his distilla tion in July last in the war steamer Minnesota. Special ministers to China have also been ap pointed by the governments of Great Britain and France. Whilst our minister has been instructed to occupy a neutral position in reference to the existing hostilities at Canton, he will cordially co-operate with the British and French minis ters in all peaceful measures to secure by trea ty stipulations, those just concessions to com merce which the nations of the world have a right to expect, and which China cannot long be permitted to withhold. From assurances received, I entertain no dount that the three ministers will act in harnionus concert to obtain similar commercial treaties for each ot the powers they represent. . We cannot fail to teel a deep interest m all that coDcerns tho welfare of the independent republics of our own continent, as well as of the empire of Brazil. . .' . ' Our difficulties with New Granada, which a short time since bore so threatening an aspect are, it is to be hoped, in a fair train of settle ment in a manner just and honorable to both parties. The Isthmus of Central America, including that of Panama, is the great highway between the Atlantic and Pacific, over which a largo portion of the commerce of the world is des tined to pass. The United States are more deeply interested than any other nation in pre serving the freedom and security of all the communications across this isthmus. It is onr duty, therefore, to take care that they shall not be "interrnpted either by invasions from our own country or by wars between the inde pendent States of Central America. Under our treaty with Xew Granada of the 12th Dec. 1846, we are bound to guarantee the neutral ity of the Isthmus of Panama, through which the Panama railroad passes, "as well as the rights of sovereignty and property w hich New Granada has ami possesses over the said Terri tory." This obligation is founded upon e quivalents granted by the treaty to the gov ernment and people of the United States. Under these circumstances, I recommend to Congress the passage of an act authorizing tho President, in case of necessity, to employ the land and naval forces of the United States to carry into effect this guarranty of neutrality and protection. I also recommend similar le gislation for the security of any other routo across the isthmus in which we may acquire an interest by treaty. With the independent republics on this con tinent it is both our duty and our interest to cultivate the most friendly relations. We can never feel indifferent to their fate, and must always rejoice in their prosperity. Unfortu nately, both for them and for us, our example and advice have lost much of their influence in consequence of the lawless expeditions which have been fitted out against some of them within the limits of our country. Noth ing is better calculated to retard our steady material progress, or impair our character s a nation, than the toleration of such enterprises in violation cf the law of nations. It is one of the first and highest duties ot any independent State, in its relations with the members of the great family of nations, to re strain its people from acts of hostile aggres sion against their citizens cr subjects. Tho most eminent writers on public law do not hes itate to denounce such hostile acts as robbery aud murder. Weak and feeble States, like those of Cen tral America, may not feel themselves able to assert and vindicate their rights. The case would be far different if expeditions were set on foot within our own territories to make private war against a powerful nation. If such expeditious were fitted out from abroad against any portion of our own country, to burn down our cities, murder and plunder our people, and usurp our government, we should call any power on earth to the strictest account for not preventing such enormities. Ever since the administration of General Washington, acts ot Congress have been in force to punish severely the crime of setting on foot a military expedition within the limits of the United States, to proceed from thence against a nation or State, with whom we are at peace. The present neutrality act of April 20th, 1818, is but little more than a collection of pre-existing laws. Under this act the President is empowered to employ the land aud naval forces and the militia "for the pur pose ot preventing the carrying on of any such expeditions or enterprise from the terri tories and jurisdicton of the United States," and the collectors of customs are authorized, and required to detain any vessel in port when there is reason to believe she is about to take part in such lawless enterprises. When it was first rendered probable that an attempt would bo made to get up another un lawful exedition against Nicaragua, the Sec retary of State issued instructions to the mar shals and district attorneys, which were direc ted by the Secretaries of War aud the Navy to the appropriate army and navy officers, re quiring tlicm to be vigilant, ant to use tueir best exertions in carrying into effect the pro- visions of the act of 1818. .Notwithstanding these precautions, the expedition has escaped from our shores. Such enterprises can do ro possible good to the country, but have already inflicted much injury both on its interests and its character. They have prevented peaceful emi'ation from the L nited States to the States of Central America, which could not fail to prove highlv beneficial to all the parties concerned. In a pccutiiary point of Tiew a lone, onr citizens have sustained heavy losses from the seizure and closing of the transit route by the ban Juan, between the two oceans. The leader of tho recent expedition was ar rested at New Orleans, but was discharged on giving bail for his appearauce in tho insuffi cient sum of two thousand dollars. I commend the whole subject to the serious attention of Congress, believing that our duty and our interest, as well as our national char acter, require that we should adopt such mea sures as will be effectual iu restraining our cit izens from committing such outrages. I regret to inform you that the President of Paraguay has refused to ratify the treaty be tween the United States and that State, as amended by the Senate, the signature ot which was mentioned in the message of my prede cessor to Congress at the opening of its ses sion in December, 1853. The reasons assign ed for this refusal will appear in the correspon dence herewith submitted. It being desirable to ascertain the fitness of the river La Plata and its tributaries for navi gation by steam, the United States Steamer Water Witch was sent thither for that purpose in 1853. This enterprise was successfully car ried on until February, 1855, when, whilst ia the eaceful prosecution of her voyage up the Para a river, the steamer was fired upon by a Paraguavan fort. The fire was returned ; but as the Water Witch was of small force, and not designed for offensive operations, she re tired from "he conflict. The pretext npoa which the attack was made was a decree of the President of Paraguay of October, 1854, prohibiting foreign vessels of war from navi gating the rivers of that State. As Para guay, however, was the owner of but one bank or the river of that name, the oth er belonging to Corrientes, a Stale of the Argentine Confederation, the right of its gov ernment to expect that such a decree would be obeyed cannot be acknowledged. . But tho Water Witch was not, properly speaking, a vessel-of-war. She was a small steamer en. gaged in a scientific enterprise intended for the advantage of commercial States general ly. Under these circumstances, I am con strained to consider the attack upon her as unjustifiable, and as calling for satisfaction from the Paraguayan government. Citizens of the . United States, also, who were established in business in Paraguay ,have hd thejr property seizod and taken from them,
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers