SPECIAL MESSAGES.
DECEMBER 6, 1805.
To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States:
The depredations which had been committed on the commerce of the United States during a preceding war by persons under the authority of Spain are sufficiently known to all. These made it a duty to require from that Government indemnifications for our injured citizens. A convention was accordingly entered into between the minister of the United States at Madrid and the minister of that Government for foreign affairs, by which it was agreed that spoliations committed by Spanish subjects and carried into ports of Spain should be paid for by that nation, and that those committed by French subjects and carried into Spanish ports should remain for further discussion. Before this convention was returned to Spain with our ratification the transfer of Louisiana by France to the United States took place, an event as unexpected as disagreeable to Spain. From that moment she seemed to change her conduct and dispositions toward us. It was first manifested by her protest against the right of France to alienate Louisiana to us, which, however, was soon retracted and the right confirmed. Then high offense was manifested at the act of Congress establishing a collection district on the Mobile, although by an authentic declaration immediately made it was expressly confined to our acknowledged limits; and she now refused to ratify the convention signed by her own minister under the eye of his Sovereign unless we would consent to alterations of its terms which would have affected our claims against her for the spoliations by French subjects carried into Spanish ports.
To obtain justice as well as to restore friendship I thought a special mission advisable, and accordingly appointed James Monroe minister extraordinary and plenipotentiary to repair to Madrid, and in conjunction with our minister resident there to endeavor to procure a ratification of the former convention and to come to an understanding with Spain as to the boundaries of Louisiana. It appeared at once that her policy was to reserve herself for events, and in the meantime to keep our differences in an undetermined state. This will be evident from the papers now communicated to you. After nearly five months of fruitless endeavor to bring them to some definite and satisfactory result, our ministers ended the conferences without having been able to obtain indemnity for spoliations of any description or any satisfaction as to the boundaries of Louisiana, other than a declaration that we had no rights eastward of the Iberville, and that our line to the west was one which would have left us but a string of land on that bank of the river Mississippi. Our injured citizens were thus left without any prospect of retribution from the wrongdoer, and as to boundary each party was to take its own course. That which they have chosen to pursue will appear from the documents now communicated. They authorize the inference that it is their intention to advance on our possessions until they shall be repressed by an opposing force. Considering that Congress alone is constitutionally invested with the power of changing our condition from peace to war, I have thought it my duty to await their authority for using force in any degree which could be avoided. I have barely instructed the officers stationed in the neighborhood of the aggressions to protect our citizens from violence, to patrol within the borders actually delivered to us, and not to go out of them but when necessary to repel an inroad or to rescue a citizen or his property; and the Spanish officers remaining at New Orleans are required to depart without further delay. It ought to be noted here that since the late change in the state of affairs in Europe Spain has ordered her cruisers and courts to respect our treaty with her.
The conduct of France and the part she may take in the misunderstandings between the United States and Spain are too important to be unconsidered. She was prompt and decided in her declarations that our demands on Spain for French spoliations carried into Spanish ports were included in the settlement between the United States and France. She took at once the ground that she had acquired no right from Spain, and had meant to deliver us none eastward of the Iberville, her silence as to the western boundary leaving us to infer her opinion might be against Spain in that quarter. Whatever direction she might mean to give to these differences, it does not appear that she has contemplated their proceeding to actual rupture, or that at the date of our last advices from Paris her Government had any suspicion of the hostile attitude Spain had taken here; on the contrary, we have reason to believe that she was disposed to effect a settlement on a plan analogous to what our ministers had proposed, and so comprehensive as to remove as far as possible the grounds of future collision and controversy on the eastern as well as western side of the Mississippi.
The present crisis in Europe is favorable for pressing such a settlement, and not a moment should be lost in availing ourselves of it. Should it pass unimproved, our situation would become much more difficult. Formal war is not necessary—it is not probable it will follow; but the protection of our citizens, the spirit and honor of our country require that force should be interposed to a certain degree it will probably contribute to advance the object of peace,
But the course to be pursued will require the command of means which it belongs to Congress exclusively to yield or to deny. To them I communicate every fact material for their information and the documents necessary to enable them to judge for themselves. To their wisdom, then, I look for the course I am to pursue, and will pursue with sincere zeal that which they shall approve.
TH. JEFFERSON.
DECEMBER 11, 1805.
To the Senate of the United States:
I now lay before the Senate the several treaties and conventions following, which have been entered into on the part of the United States since their last session:
1. A treaty of peace and amity between the United States of America and the Bashaw, Bey, and subjects of Tripoli, in Barbary.
2. A treaty between the United States and the Wyandot, Ottawa, Chippewa, Munsee, and Delaware, Shawnee, and Potawatamie nations of Indians.
3. A treaty between the United States and the agents of the Connecticut Land Companies on one part and the Wyandot, Ottawa, Chippewa, Munsee, and Delaware, Shawnee, and Potawatamie nations of Indians.
4. A treaty between the United States and the Delawares, Potawatamies, Miamis, Eel-rivers, and Weeas.
5. A treaty between the United States and the Chickasaw Nation of Indians.
6. A treaty between the United States of America and the Cherokee Indians.
7. A convention between the United States and the Creek Nation of Indians; with the several documents necessary for their explanation.
The Senate having dissented to the ratification of the treaty with the Creeks submitted to them at their last session, which gave a sum of $200,000 for the country thereby conveyed, it is proper now to observe that instead of that sum, which was equivalent to a perpetual annuity of $12,000, the present purchase gives them an annuity of $12,000 for eight years only and of $11,000 for ten years more, the payments of which would be effected by a present sum of $130,000 placed at an annual interest of 6 per cent. If from this sum we deduct the reasonable value of the road ceded through the whole length of their country from Ocmulgee toward New Orleans, a road of indispensable necessity to us, the present convention will be found to give little more than the half of the sum which was formerly proposed to be given. This difference is thought sufficient to justify the presenting this subject a second time to the Senate. On these several treaties I have to request that the Senate will advise whether I shall ratify them or not.
TH. JEFFERSON.
DECEMBER 23, 1805.
To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States:
The governor and presiding judge of the Territory of Michigan have made a report to me of the state of that Territory, several matters in which being within the reach of the legislative authority only, I lay the report before Congress.
TH. JEFFERSON.
DECEMBER 31, 1805.
To the House of Representatives of the United States:
I now communicate to the House of Representatives all the information which the executive offices furnish on the subject of their resolution of the 23d instant respecting the States indebted to the United States.
TH. JEFFERSON.
JANUARY 10, 1806.
To the Senate of the United States:
In compliance with the request of the Senate expressed in their resolution of December 27, I now lay before them such documents and papers (there being no other information in my possession) as relate to complaints by the Government of France against the commerce carried on by the citizens of the United States to the French island of St. Domingo.
TH. JEFFERSON.
JANUARY 13, 1806.
To the Senate of the United States:
According to the request of the Senate of December 30, I now lay before them the correspondence of the naval commanders Barron and Rodgers and of Mr. Eaton, late consul at Tunis, respecting the progress of the war with Tripoli, antecedent to the treaty with the Bey and Regency of Tripoli, and respecting the negotiations for the same, and the commission and instructions of Mr. Eaton, with such other correspondence in possession of the offices as I suppose may be useful to the Senate in their deliberations upon the said treaty.
The instructions which were given to Mr. Lear, the consul-general at Algiers, respecting the negotiations for the said treaty accompanied the treaty and the message concerning the same, and are now with them in possession of the Senate.
So much of these papers has been extracted and communicated to the House of Representatives as relates to the principles of the cooperation between the United States and Hamet Caramalli, which is the subject of a joint message to both Houses of Congress bearing equal date with the present, and as those now communicated to the Senate comprehend the whole of that matter, I request that they may be considered as comprising the documents stated in that message as accompanying it. Being mostly originals or sole copies, a return of them is requested at the convenience of the Senate.
We have no letter from Mr. Lear respecting Tripoline affairs of later date than that of July 5, which was transmitted to the Senate with the treaty, nor, consequently, any later information what steps have been taken to carry into effect the stipulation for the delivery of the wife and children of the brother of the reigning Bashaw of Tripoli.
TH. JEFFERSON.
JANUARY 13, 1806.
To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States:
I lay before Congress the application of Hamet Caramalli, elder brother of the reigning Bashaw of Tripoli, soliciting from the United States attention to his services and sufferings in the late war against that State; and in order to possess them of the ground on which that application stands, the facts shall be stated according to the views and information of the Executive.
During the war with Tripoli it was suggested that Hamet Caramalli, elder brother of the reigning Bashaw, and driven by him from his throne, meditated the recovery of his inheritance, and that a concert in action with us was desirable to him. We considered that concerted operations by those who have a common enemy were entirely justifiable, and might produce effects favorable to both without binding either to guarantee the objects of the other. But the distance of the scene, the difficulties of communication, and the uncertainty of our information inducing the less confidence in the measure, it was committed to our agents as one which might be resorted to if it promised to promote our success.
Mr. Eaton, however (our late consul), on his return from the Mediterranean, possessing personal knowledge of the scene and having confidence in the effect of a joint operation, we authorized Commodore Barron, then proceeding with his squadron, to enter into an understanding with Hamet if he should deem it useful; and as it was represented that he would need some aids of arms and ammunition, and even of money, he was authorized to furnish them to a moderate extent, according to the prospect of utility to be expected from it. In order to avail him of the advantages of Mr. Eaton's knowledge of circumstances, an occasional employment was provided for the latter as an agent for the Navy in that sea. Our expectation was that an intercourse should be kept up between the ex-Bashaw and the commodore; that while the former moved on by land our squadron should proceed with equal pace, so as to arrive at their destination together and to attack the common enemy by land and sea at the same time. The instructions of June 6 to Commodore Barron shew that a cooperation only was intended, and by no means an union of our object with the fortune of the ex-Bashaw, and the commodore's letters of March 22 and May 19 prove that he had the most correct idea of our intentions. His verbal instructions, indeed, to Mr. Eaton and Captain Hull, if the expressions are accurately committed to writing by those gentlemen, do not limit the extent of his cooperation as rigorously as he probably intended; but it is certain from the ex-Bashaw's letter of January 3, written when he was proceeding to join Mr. Eaton, and in which he says, "Your operations should be carried on by sea, mine by land," that he left the position in which he was with a proper idea of the nature of the cooperation. If Mr. Eaton's subsequent convention should appear to bring forward other objects, his letter of April 29 and May 1 views this convention but as provisional, the second article, as he expressly states, guarding it against any ill effect; and his letter of June 30 confirms this construction.
In the event it was found that after placing the ex-Bashaw in possession of Derne, one of the most important cities and provinces of the country, where he had resided himself as governor, lie was totally unable to command any resources or to bear any part in cooperation with us. This hope was then at an end, and we certainly had never contemplated, nor were we prepared, to land an army of our own, or to raise, pay, or subsist an army of Arabs to march from Derne to Tripoli and to carry on a land war at such a distance from our resources. Our means and our authority were merely naval, and that such were the expectations of Hamet his letter of June 29 is an unequivocal acknowledgment. While, therefore, an impression from the capture of Derne might still operate at Tripoli, and an attack on that place from our squadron was daily expected. Colonel Lear thought it the best moment to listen to overtures of peace then made by the Bashaw. He did so, and while urging provisions for the United States he paid attention also to the interests of Hamet, but was able to effect nothing more than to engage the restitution of his family, and even the persevering in this demand suspended for some time the conclusion of the treaty.
In operations at such a distance it becomes necessary to leave much to the discretion of the agents employed, but events may still turn up beyond the limits of that discretion. Unable in such a case to consult his Government, a zealous citizen will act as he believes that would direct him were it apprised of the circumstances, and will take on himself the responsibility. In all these cases the purity and patriotism of the motives should shield the agent from blame, and even secure a sanction where the error is not too injurious. Should it be thought by any that the verbal instructions said to have been given by Commodore Barron to Mr. Eaton amount to a stipulation that the United States should place Hamet Caramalli on the throne of Tripoli—a stipulation so entirely unauthorized, so far beyond our views, and so onerous could not be sanctioned by our Government—or should Hamet Caramalli, contrary to the evidence of his letters of January 3 and June 29, be thought to have left the position which he now seems to regret, under a mistaken expectation that we were at all events to place him on his throne, on an appeal to the liberality of the nation something equivalent to the replacing him in his former situation might be worthy its consideration.
A nation by establishing a character of liberality and magnanimity gains in the friendship and respect of others more than the worth of mere money. This appeal is now made by Hamet Caramalli to the United States. The ground he has taken being different not only from our views but from those expressed by himself on former occasions, Mr. Eaton was desired to state whether any verbal communications passed from him to Hamet which had varied what we saw in writing. His answer of December 5 is herewith transmitted, and has rendered it still more necessary that in presenting to the Legislature the application of Hamet I should present them at the same time an exact statement of the views and proceedings of the Executive through this whole business, that they may clearly understand the ground on which we are placed. It is accompanied by all the papers which bear any relation to the principles of the cooperation, and which can inform their judgment in deciding on the application of Hamet Caramalli.
TH. JEFFERSON.
JANUARY 15, 1806.
To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States:
I now render to Congress an account of the grant of $20,000 for the contingent charges of Government by an act making appropriations for the support of Government for the year 1805. Of that sum $1,987.50 have been necessarily applied to the support of the Territorial governments of Michigan and Louisiana until an opportunity could occur of making a specific appropriation for that purpose. The balance of $18,012.50 remains in the Treasury.
TH. JEFFERSON.
JANUARY 17, 1806.
To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States:
In my message to both Houses of Congress at the opening of their present session I submitted to their attention, among other subjects, the oppression of our commerce and navigation by the irregular practices of armed vessels, public and private, and by the introduction of new principles derogatory of the rights of neutrals and unacknowledged by the usage of nations.
The memorials of several bodies of merchants of the United States are now communicated, and will develop these principles and practices which are producing the most ruinous effects on our lawful commerce and navigation.
The rights of a neutral to carry on commercial intercourse with every part of the dominions of a belligerent permitted by the laws of the country (with the exception of blockaded ports and contraband of war) was believed to have been decided between Great Britain and the United States by the sentence of their commissioners mutually appointed to decide on that and other questions of difference between the two nations, and by the actual payment of the damages awarded by them against Great Britain for the infractions of that right. When, therefore, it was perceived that the same principle was revived with others more novel and extending the injury, instructions were given to the minister plenipotentiary of the United States at the Court of London, and remonstrances duly made by him on this subject, as will appear by documents transmitted herewith. These were followed by a partial and temporary suspension only, without any disavowal of the principle. He has therefore been instructed to urge this subject anew, to bring it more fully to the bar of reason, and to insist on rights too evident and too important to be surrendered. In the meantime the evil is proceeding under adjudications founded on the principle which is denied. Under these circumstances the subject presents itself for the consideration of Congress.
On the impressment of our seamen our remonstrances have never been intermitted. A hope existed at one moment of an arrangement which might have been submitted to, but it soon passed away, and the practice, though relaxed at times in the distant seas, has been constantly pursued in those in our neighborhood. The grounds on which the reclamations on this subject have been urged will appear in an extract from instructions to our minister at London now communicated.
TH. JEFFERSON.
JANUARY 17, 1806
To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States:
The inclosed letter from the minister plenipotentiary of the United States at the Court of London contains interesting information on the subjects of my other message of this date. It is sent separately and confidentially because its publication may discourage frank communications between our ministers generally and the Governments with which they reside, and especially between the same ministers.
TH. JEFFERSON.
JANUARY 24, 1806.
To the Senate of the United States:
A convention has been entered into between the United States and the Cherokee Nation for the extinguishment of the rights of the latter, and of some unsettled claims in the country north of the river Tennessee, therein described. This convention is now laid before the Senate for their advice and consent as to its ratification.
TH. JEFFERSON.
JANUARY 27, 1806.
To the Senate of the United States:
According to the desire of the Senate expressed in their resolution of the 10th instant, I now communicate to them a report of the Secretary of State, with its documents, stating certain new principles attempted to be introduced on the subject of neutral rights, injurious to the rights and interests of the United States. These, with my message to both Houses of the 17th instant and the documents accompanying it, fulfill the desires of the Senate as far as it can be done by any information in my possession which is authentic and not publicly known.
TH. JEFFERSON.
JANUARY 29, 1806.
To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States:
Having received from sundry merchants at Baltimore a memorial on the same subject with those I communicated to Congress with my message of the 17th instant, I now communicate this also as a proper sequel to the former, and as making a part of the mass of evidence of the violations of our rights on the ocean.
TH. JEFFERSON.
FEBRUARY 3, 1806.
To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States:
A letter has been received from the governor of South Carolina covering an act of the legislature of that State ceding to the United States various forts and fortifications and sites for the erection of forts in that State on the conditions therein expressed. This letter and the act it covered are now communicated to Congress.
I am not informed whether the positions ceded are the best which can be taken for securing their respective objects. No doubt is entertained that the legislature deemed them such. The river of Beaufort, particularly, said to be accessible to ships of very large size and capable of yielding them a protection which they can not find elsewhere but very far to the north, is from these circumstances so interesting to the Union in general as to merit particular attention and inquiry as to the positions on it best calculated for health as well as safety.
TH. JEFFERSON.
FEBRUARY 3, 1806.
To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States:
In the course of the last year the following treaties and conventions for the extinguishment of Indian title to lands within our limits were entered into on behalf of the United States:
A treaty between the United States and the Wyandot, Ottawa, Chippeway, Munsee and Delaware, Shawanee and Pottawatamy nations of Indians.
A treaty between the United States and the agents of the Connecticut Land Company on one part and the Wyandot and Ottawa, Chippeway, Munsey and Delaware, Shawanee and Pottawatamy nations of Indians.
A treaty between the United States and the Delawares, Pottawatamies, Miamis, Eel-rivers, and Weas.
A treaty between the United States and the Chickasaw Nation of Indians.
Two treaties between the United States and the Cherokee Indians.
A convention between the United States and the Creek Nation of Indians.
The Senate having advised and consented to the ratification of these several treaties and conventions, I now lay them before both Houses of Congress for the exercise of their constitutional powers as to the means of fulfilling them.
TH. JEFFERSON.
FEBRUARY 6, 1806.
To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States:
Since the date of my message of January 17 a letter of the 26th of November has been received from the minister plenipotentiary of the United States at London, covering one from the secretary for foreign affairs of that Government, which, being on the subject of that message, is now transmitted for the information of Congress. Although nothing forbids the substance of these letters from being communicated without reserve, yet so many ill effects proceed from the publications of correspondences between ministers remaining still in office that I can not but recommend that these letters be not permitted to be formally published.
TH. JEFFERSON.
FEBRUARY 19, 1806.
To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States:
In pursuance of a measure proposed to Congress by a message of January 18, 1803, and sanctioned by their approbation for carrying it into execution, Captain Meriwether Lewis, of the First Regiment of infantry, was appointed, with a party of men, to explore the river Missouri from its mouth to its source, and, crossing the highlands by the shortest portage, to seek the best water communication thence to the Pacific Ocean; and Lieutenant Clarke was appointed second in command. They were to enter into conference with the Indian nations on their route with a view to the establishment of commerce with them. They entered the Missouri May 14, 1804, and on the 1st of November took up their winter quarters near the Mandan towns, 1,609 miles above the mouth of the river, in latitude 47° 21' 47" north and longitude 99° 24' 45" west from Greenwich. On the 8th of April, 1805, they proceeded up the river in pursuance of the objects prescribed to them. A letter of the preceding day, April 7th, from Captain Lewis is herewith communicated. During his stay among the Mandans he had been able to lay down the Missouri according to courses and distances taken on his passage up it, corrected by frequent observations of longitude and latitude, and to add to the actual survey of this portion of the river a general map of the country between the Mississippi and Pacific from the thirty-fourth to the fifty-fourth degree of latitude. These additions are from information collected from Indians with whom he had opportunities of communicating during his journey and residence with them. Copies of this map are now presented to both Houses of Congress. With these I communicate also a statistical view, procured and forwarded by him, of the Indian nations inhabiting the Territory of Louisiana and the countries adjacent to its northern and western borders, of their commerce, and of other interesting circumstances respecting them.
In order to render the statement as complete as may be of the Indians inhabiting the country west of the Mississippi, I add Dr. Sibley's account of those residing in and adjacent to the Territory of Orleans.
I communicate also, from the same person, an account of the Red River, according to the best information he had been able to collect.
Having been disappointed, after considerable preparation, in the purpose of sending an exploring party up that river in the summer of 1804, it was thought best to employ the autumn of that year in procuring a knowledge of an interesting branch of the river called the Washita.
This was undertaken under the direction of Mr. Dunbar, of Natchez, a citizen of distinguished science, who had aided and continues to aid us with his disinterested and valuable services in the prosecution of these enterprises. He ascended the river to the remarkable hot springs near it, in latitude 34° 31' 4.16", longitude 92° 50' 45" west from Greenwich, taking its courses and distances, and correcting them by frequent celestial observations. Extracts from his observations and copies of his map of the river from its mouth to the hot springs make part of the present communications. The examination of the Red River itself is but now commencing.
TH. JEFFERSON.
MARCH 5, 1806.
To the Senate of the United States:
According to the request of the Senate expressed in their resolution of 3d instant, I now transmit the extract of a letter from the Secretary of State to the minister plenipotentiary of the United States at Paris, the answer to that letter, and two letters from Henry Waddell, a citizen of the United States, relative to the interference of the said minister in the case of the ship New Jersey and to the principles alleged to have been laid down on that occasion.
There are in the office of the Department of State several printed documents in this case by the agent of those interested in the ship, which are voluminous and in French. If these be within the scope of the request of the Senate, the printed copies can be sent in immediately, but if translations be necessary some considerable time will be requisite for their execution. On this subject any further desire which the Senate shall think proper to express shall be complied with.
TH. JEFFERSON.
MARCH 7, 1806.
To the Senate of the United States:
According to the request of the Senate of yesterday, I now transmit the five printed memorials of the agent for the ship New Jersey, in the one of which marked B, at the ninth page, will be found the letter relative to it from the minister plenipotentiary of the United States at Paris to the French minister of the treasury, supposed to be the one designated in the resolution. We have no information of this letter but through the channel of the party interested in the ship, nor any proof of it more authentic than that now communicated.
TH. JEFFERSON.
MARCH 19, 1806.
To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States:
It was reasonably expected that while the limits between the territories of the United States and of Spain were unsettled neither party would have innovated on the existing state of their respective positions. Some time since, however, we learnt that the Spanish authorities were advancing into the disputed country to occupy new posts and make new settlements. Unwilling to take any measures which might preclude a peaceable accommodation of differences, the officers of the United States were ordered to confine themselves within the country on this side of the Sabine River which, by delivery of its principal post, Natchitoches, was understood to have been itself delivered up by Spain, and at the same time to permit no adverse post to be taken nor armed men to remain within it. In consequence of these orders the commanding officer of Natchitoches, learning that a party of Spanish troops had crossed the Sabine River and were posting themselves on this side the Adais, sent a detachment of his force to require them to withdraw to the other side of the Sabine, which they accordingly did.
I have thought it proper to communicate to Congress the letter detailing this incident, that they may fully understand the state of things in that quarter and be enabled to make such provision for its security as, in their wisdom, they shall deem sufficient.
TH. JEFFERSON.
APRIL 11, 1806.
To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States:
I now lay before Congress a statement of the militia of the United States according to the returns last received from the several States and Territories. It will be perceived that some of these are not of recent dates, and that from the States of Maryland and Delaware no returns are stated. As far as appears from our records, none were ever rendered from either of these States. From the Territories of Orleans, Louisiana, and Michigan complete returns have not yet been received.
TH. JEFFERSON.
APRIL 14, 1806.
To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States:
During the blockade of Tripoli by the squadron of the United States a small cruiser, under the flag of Tunis, with two prizes, all of trifling value, attempted to enter Tripoli; was turned back, warned, and, attempting again to enter, was taken and detained as prize by the squadron. Her restitution was claimed by the Bey of Tunis with a threat of war in terms so serious that on withdrawing from the blockade of Tripoli the commanding officer of the squadron thought it his duty to repair to Tunis with his squadron and to require a categorical declaration whether peace or war was intended. The Bey preferred explaining himself by an ambassador to the United States, who on his arrival renewed the request that the vessel and her prizes should be restored. It was deemed proper to give this proof of friendship to the Bey, and the ambassador was informed the vessels would be restored. Afterwards he made a requisition of naval stores to be sent to the Bey, in order to secure a peace for the term of three years, with a threat of war if refused. It has been refused, and the ambassador is about to depart without receding from his threat or demand.
Under these circumstances, and considering that the several provisions of the act of March 25, 1804, will cease in consequence of the ratification of the treaty of peace with Tripoli, now advised and consented to by the Senate, I have thought it my duty to communicate these facts, in order that Congress may consider the expediency of continuing the same provisions for a limited time or making others equivalent.
TH. JEFFERSON.
APRIL 15, 1806.
To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States:
The Senate having advised and consented to the ratification of a treaty concluded with the Piankeshaw Indians for extinguishing their claim to the country between the Wabash and Kaskaskia cessions, it is now laid before both Houses for the exercise of their constitutional powers as to the means of fulfilling it on our part.
TH. JEFFERSON.
APRIL 17, 1806.
To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States:
The Senate having advised and consented to the ratification of a convention between the United States and the Cherokee Indians, concluded at Washington on the 7th day of January last, for the cession of their right to the tract of country therein described, it is now laid before both Houses of Congress for the exercise of their constitutional powers toward the fulfillment thereof.
TH. JEFFERSON.
APRIL 18, 1806.
To the Senate of the United States:
In compliance with the request of the Senate of yesterday's date, I now communicate the entire correspondence between the ambassador of Tunis and the Secretary of State, from which the Senate will see that the first application by the ambassador for restitution of the vessels taken in violation of blockade having been yielded to, the only remaining cause of difference brought forward by him is the requisition of a present of naval stores to secure a peace for three years, after which the inference is obvious that a renewal of the presents is to be expected to renew the prolongation of peace for another term. But this demand has been pressed in verbal conferences much more explicitly and pertinaciously than appears in the written correspondence. To save the delay of copying, some originals are inclosed, with a request that they be returned.
TH. JEFFERSON.
APRIL 19, 1806.
To the Senate of the United States:
I nominate James Monroe, now minister plenipotentiary of the United States at the Court of London, and William Pinkney, of Maryland, to be commissioners plenipotentiary and extraordinary for settling all matters of difference between the United States and the United Kingdoms of Great Britain and Ireland relative to wrongs committed between the parties on the high seas or other waters, and for establishing the principles of navigation and commerce between them.
James Houston, of Maryland, to be judge of the court of the United States for the district of Maryland.
Willis W. Parker, of Virginia, to be collector of the district and inspector of the revenue for the port of South Quay.
TH. JEFFERSON.