A Compilation of the Messages and Papers of the Presidents. Volume 2, part 1: James Monroe

by Unknown

SPECIAL MESSAGES.

DECEMBER 6, 1824.

To the House of Representatives of the United States:

Agreeably to a resolution of the House of Representatives of the 13th of May last, requesting the President to cause to be made and submitted to the House on the first day of the next [present] session of Congress a full and complete statement of the exact number of lots belonging to the United States in the city of Washington which have been sold by the public agents for that purpose; when sold, by whom, to whom, and for what price each lot was purchased; what part of the purchase money has been paid, the amount due, and by whom due, and when payable; whether the debts are well secured, and whether the money received has been applied, to what purposes, and by whom, I herewith transmit a report and statements from the Commissioner of Public Buildings, which will afford the information required.

JAMES MONROE.

DECEMBER 13, 1824.

To the House of Representatives of the United States:

In compliance with an act of Congress which originated in the House of Representatives, passed the 26th of May, 1824, "to authorize the President of the United States to enter into certain negotiations relative to lands located under Virginia military land warrants, lying between Ludlow's and Roberts's lines, in the State of Ohio," I herewith transmit a report, with accompanying documents, from the Commissioner of the General Land Office, shewing the measures which have been taken under the provisions of the aforesaid act.

JAMES MONROE.

WASHINGTON, December 13, 1824.

The PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE PRO TEMPORE:

I transmit to the Senate a convention, negotiated and signed by Samuel D. Heap, acting consul of the United States, on the part of the United States, and Mahmoud Bashaw, Bey of Tunis, on the 24th day of February last, together with copies of Mr. Heap's correspondence appertaining to the negotiation of the same, for the constitutional consideration of the Senate with regard to its ratification.

JAMES MONROE.

WASHINGTON, December 13, 1824.

The PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES PRO TEMPORE:

I transmit to the Senate the convention, signed by the plenipotentiaries of the United States and of His Imperial Majesty the Emperor of Russia at St. Petersburg on the 5th (17th) of April last, referred to in my message to both Houses of Congress, together with the documents appertaining to the negotiation of the same, for the constitutional consideration of the Senate with regard to its ratification.

JAMES MONROE.

WASHINGTON, December 23, 1824.

To the House of Representatives of the United States:

Agreeably to a resolution of the House of Representatives of the 15th instant, requesting the President to lay before the House a copy of the instructions under which the articles of a treaty with the Cherokee Indians were formed by Daniel Smith and R.J. Meigs, acting as commissioners of the United States, at Telico on the 24th October, 1804, with copies of all the correspondence or other documents relating to that instrument in either of the Executive Departments, with a statement of the causes which prevented an earlier decision upon it, I herewith transmit a report from the Secretary of War, with the documents referred to in it.

JAMES MONROE.

WASHINGTON, December 23, 1824.

To the House of Representatives of the United States:

I herewith transmit to the House a report from the Secretary of State, with copies of the correspondence with the Government of France requested by the resolution of the House of the 26th May last.

JAMES MONROE.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
Washington, December 23, 1824.

The Secretary of State, to whom has been referred a resolution of the House of Representatives of the 26th of May last, requesting that the President of the United States would lay before that House at the then next session, as early as the public interest would permit, the correspondence which might be held with the Government of France prior to that time on the subject of injuries sustained by citizens of the United States since the year 1806, has the honor of reporting to the President copies of the documents requested by that resolution.

JAMES MONROE.

[Extract of a letter from Mr. Adams (No. 1) to Mr. Sheldon, dated Department of State, Washington, August 13, 1823.]

I have had the honor of receiving your dispatches Nos. 1 and 2, the latter dated the 10th of June. Mr. Gallatin arrived with his family at New York on the 24th of that month.

I inclose herewith copies of the recent correspondence between the Count de Menou, the chargé d'affaires of France, and this Department on various subjects highly interesting to the relations between the two countries.

With regard to the Count's note of the 11th of July, the President received with great satisfaction the testimonial of the Viscount de Chateaubriand to the candor and ability with which Mr. Gallatin has performed the duties of his official station in France. The proposal to renew the negotiation in behalf of the well-founded claims of our citizens upon the French Government in connection with a claim on the part of France to special privileges in the ports of Louisiana, which, after a very full discussion, had in the views of this Government been proved utterly groundless, could neither be accepted nor considered as evidence of the same conciliatory spirit. The claims of our citizens are for mere justice; they are for reparation of unquestionable wrongs—for indemnity or restitution of property taken from them or destroyed without shadow or color of right. The claim under the eighth article of the Louisiana convention has nothing to rest upon but a forced construction of the terms of the stipulation, which the American Government considered, and have invariably considered, as totally without foundation. These are elements not to be coupled together in the same negotiation, and while we yet trust to the final sense of justice of France for the adjustment of the righteous claims of our citizens, we still hope that their unquestionable character will ultimately secure to them a consideration unencumbered with other discussions. You will respectfully make this representation to the Viscount de Chateaubriand, with the assurance of the readiness of this Government to discuss the question upon the Louisiana convention further if desired by France, but of our final conviction that it is not to be blended with the claims of our citizens for mere justice.

Count de Menou to Mr. Adams.

[Translation.]

LEGATION OF FRANCE TO THE UNITED STATES,
Washington, July 11, 1823.

The Honorable SECRETARY OF STATE:

His Excellency the Viscount de Chateaubriand, in announcing to me that Mr. Gallatin was about to leave France, expresses his regret at his departure in such terms that I should do him injustice were I not to use his own expressions. "My correspondence with this minister," he remarks to me, "has caused me to appreciate his talents, his ability, and his attachment to the system of friendship that unites the two powers. It is with regret that I suspend my communications with him."

I esteem myself happy, sir, in conveying to you such sentiments toward the representative of the United States in France, and I should have thought that I had but imperfectly apprehended the design of the Viscount de Chateaubriand had I neglected to communicate them to the Federal Government.

The minister for foreign affairs reminds me also on this occasion that Mr. Gallatin having frequently laid before him claims of Americans against the French Government, he had shown himself disposed to enter upon a general negotiation, in which they should be comprehended with claims of French citizens against the Federal Government at the same time with the arrangement relative to the execution of the eighth article of the treaty of Louisiana, The object of his excellency was to arrive at a speedy and friendly disposition of all difficulties that might subsist between the two powers, well assured that France and the United States would be found to have the same views of justice and conciliation.

His excellency regrets that Mr. Gallatin, who, he says, "has convinced him how pleasing and advantageous it is to negotiate with a statesman who exhibits candor and ability in his discussions," did not receive from his Government during his stay in France the necessary powers for this double negotiation. But he informs me that the Government of His Majesty remains always disposed to open it, either with Mr. Gallatin should he return with these powers, or with Mr. Sheldon if the Federal Government should think proper to confer them on him.

I greatly desire, sir, to see these propositions acceded to by the Federal Government and to be able to reply to his excellency, as he expresses his wish that an arrangement putting an end to every subject of discussion might soon be expected.

I pray the Secretary of State to receive the renewed assurance of my high consideration.

The chargé d'affaires of France near the United States,

MENOU.

Mr. Adams to Count de Menou.

DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
Washington, August 12, 1823.

The COUNT DE MENOU,
Chargé d'Affaires from France.

SIR: Your letter of the 11th of last month has been submitted to the consideration of the President of the United States, by whom I am directed to express the high satisfaction that he has felt at the manner in which His Excellency the Viscount de Chateaubriand has noticed in his correspondence with you the temporary absence of Mr. Gallatin from France and the terms of regard and esteem with which he notices the character and conduct of that minister. The anxious desire of the President for the promotion of the good understanding between the United States and France could not be more gratified than by the testimonial of His Most Christian Majesty's Government to the good faith and ability with which the minister of the United States at his Court has performed his official duties.

With regard to the assurance of His Excellency the Viscount de Chateaubriand's disposition to enter upon a negotiation with Mr. Gallatin in the event of his return to France, or with Mr. Sheldon during his absence, concerning the claims of citizens of the United States on the Government of France in connection with an arrangement concerning the eighth article of the Louisiana treaty, I am directed to observe that those subjects rest upon grounds so totally different that the Government of the United States can not consent to connect them together in negotiation.

The claims of the citizens of the United States upon the French Government have been of many years' standing, often represented by successive ministers of the United States, and particularly by Mr. Gallatin during a residence of seven years, with a perspicuity of statement and a force of evidence which could leave to the Government of the United States no desire but that they should have been received with friendly attention and no regret but that they should have proved ineffectual. The justice of these claims has never been denied by France, and while the United States are still compelled to wait for their adjustment, similar and less forceful claims of the subjects of other nations have been freely admitted and liquidated.

A long and protracted discussion has already taken place between the two Governments in relation to the claim of France under the eighth article of the Louisiana convention, the result of which has been a thorough conviction on the part of the American Government that the claim has no foundation in the treaty whatever. The reasons for this conviction have been so fully set forth in the discussion that it was not anticipated a further examination of it would be thought desirable. As a subject of discussion, however, the American Government is willing to resume it whenever it may suit the views of France to present further considerations relating to it; but while convinced that the claim is entirely without foundation, they can not place it on a footing of concurrent negotiation with claims of their citizens, the justice of which is so unequivocal that they have not even been made the subject of denial.

From the attention which His Excellency the Viscount de Chateaubriand has intimated his willingness to give to the consideration of these claims the President indulges the hope that they will be taken into view upon their own merits, and in that hope the representative of the United States at Paris will at an early day be instructed to present them again to the undivided and unconditional sense of the justice of France.

I pray you, sir, to accept the renewed assurance of my distinguished consideration.

JOHN QUINCY ADAMS.

[Extract of a letter from Mr, Sheldon (No. 2) to Mr, Adams, dated Paris, October 16, 1823.]

I took an early occasion after the receipt of your dispatch No. 1, of the 10th August, to communicate the subjects of it in a conversation I had with Viscount de Chateaubriand. His observations in relation to that of the claims, as connected with the pretensions of France under the Louisiana treaty, were of a very general nature and amounted to little more than a repetition of his readiness to enter upon the consideration of whatever subjects of discussion might exist between the two countries and the expression of his satisfaction at the prospect of being soon relieved from the labor which the affairs of Spain had thrown upon him, and having thus more time to devote to those of the United States and others not of the same pressing nature. He avoided any intimation of a disposition to take up the claims by themselves, and it can hardly be expected that the French Government will at this time relax from the ground they have so lately taken upon that point. I informed him that I should communicate in writing an answer to the overture made by Count de Menou at Washington for uniting in a new negotiation this subject with that of the Louisiana treaty, in substance the same as that gentleman had already received there, and should again press upon the French Government the consideration of the claims by themselves; to which he replied that any communication I might make would be received and treated with all the attention to which it was entitled on his part.

Mr. Sheldon to the Viscount de Chateaubriand.

PARIS, October 11, 1823.

SIR: Mr. Gallatin, during his residence as minister of the United States in France, had upon various occasions called the attention of His Majesty's Government to the claims of our citizens for the reparation of wrongs sustained by them from the unjust seizure, detention, and confiscation of their property by officers and agents acting under authority of the Government of France. During the past year His Majesty's ministers had consented to enter upon the consideration of these claims, but they proposed to couple with it another subject having no connection with those claims, either in its nature, its origin, or the principles on which it depended—a question of the disputed construction of one of the articles of the treaty of cession of Louisiana, by virtue of which France claimed certain commercial privileges in the ports of that Province. Mr. Gallatin had not received from his Government any authority to connect these two dissimilar subjects in the same negotiation, or, indeed, to treat upon the latter, which had already been very amply discussed at Washington between the Secretary of State of the United States and His Majesty's minister at that place, without producing any result except a conviction on the part of the Government of the United States that the privileges for French vessels, as claimed by the minister of France, never could have been, and were not in fact, conceded by the treaty in question. A stop was then put to the negotiations already commenced in relation to the claims, and with which had been united, on the proposition of the French Government, and as being naturally connected with it, the consideration of certain claims of French citizens on the Government of the United States.

The chargé d'affaires of France at Washington has lately, on behalf of his Government, expressed to that of the United States a wish that this double negotiation might be resumed and that a definitive arrangement might be made as well in relation to the disputed article of the Louisiana treaty as of the subject of the claims upon the one side and upon the other. The Government of the United States has nothing more at heart than to remove by friendly arrangements every subject of difference which may exist between the two countries, and to examine with the greatest impartiality and good faith as well the nature and extent of the stipulations into which they have entered as the appeals to their justice made by individuals claiming reparation for wrongs supposed to have been sustained at their hands.

But these two subjects are essentially dissimilar; there are no points of connection between them; the principles upon which they depend are totally different; they have no bearing upon each other; and the justice which is due to individuals ought not to be delayed or made dependent upon the right or the wrong interpretation by one or the other party of a treaty having for its object the regulation of entirely distinct and different interests.

The reclamations of American citizens upon the Government of France are for mere justice—for the reparation of unquestionable wrongs, indemnity or restitution of property taken from them or destroyed forcibly and without right. They are of ancient date, and justice has been long and anxiously waited for. They have been often represented to the Government of France, and their validity is not disputed. Similar reclamations without greater merit or stronger titles to admission presented by citizens of other nations have been favorably received, examined, and liquidated, and it seems to have been hitherto reserved to those of the United States alone to meet with impediments at every juncture and to seek in vain the moment in which the Government of France could consent to enter upon their consideration. Although the question arising under the eighth article of the Louisiana treaty has already been fully examined, the Government of the United States is ready, if it is desired by France, and if it is thought that any new light can be thrown upon it, to discuss the subject further whenever it shall be presented anew by France to their consideration. But they are convinced that by blending it with the claims not only will no progress be made toward its solution, but that these last, standing upon their own unquestionable character, ought not to be trammeled with a subject to which they are wholly foreign.

I am instructed to bring them anew before your excellency, and to express the hope of the President that His Majesty's Government will not continue to insist upon connecting together two subjects of so different a nature, but that the claims may be taken up on their own merits and receive the consideration which they deserve, unencumbered with other discussions.

I request your excellency to accept the assurance, etc,

D. SHELDON.

[Extracts of a letter from the Secretary of State to Mr. Brown, dated Washington, December 23, 1823.]

You will immediately after your reception earnestly call the attention of the French Government to the claims of our citizens for indemnity.

You will at the same time explicitly make known that this Government can not consent to connect this discussion with that of the pretension raised by France on the construction given by her to the eighth article of the Louisiana cession treaty. The difference in the nature and character of the two interests is such that they can not with propriety be blended together. The claims are of reparation to individuals for their property taken from them by manifest and undisputed wrong. The question upon the Louisiana treaty is a question of right upon the meaning of a contract. It has been fully, deliberately, and thoroughly investigated, and the Government of the United States is under the entire and solemn conviction that the pretension of France is utterly unfounded. We are, nevertheless, willing to resume the discussion if desired by France; but to refuse justice to individuals unless the United States will accede to the construction of an article in a treaty contrary to what they believe to be its real meaning would be not only incompatible with the principles of equity, but submitting to a species of compulsion derogatory to the honor of the nation.

[Extract of a letter (No. 2) from James Brown, envoy extraordinary and minister plenipotentiary of the United States, dated April 28, 1824.]

I have in a letter to M. de Chateaubriand, copy of which I have now the honor to send, made an effort to separate the claims of our citizens from the Louisiana question.

Mr. Brown to M. de Chateaubriand.

PARIS, April 28, 1824.

His Excellency VISCOUNT DE CHATEAUBRIAND,
Minister of Foreign Affairs, etc.

SIR: In the conference with which your excellency honored me a few days ago I mentioned a subject deeply interesting to many citizens of the United States, on which I have been instructed to address your excellency, and to which I earnestly wish to call your immediate attention.

It is well known to your excellency that my predecessor, Mr. Gallatin, during several years made repeated and urgent applications to His Majesty's Government for the adjustment of claims to a very large amount, affecting the interests of American citizens and originating in gross violations of the law of nations and of the rights of the United States, and that he never could obtain from France either a settlement of those claims or even an examination and discussion of their validity. To numerous letters addressed by him to His Majesty's ministers on that subject either no answers were given or answers which had for their only object to postpone the investigation of the subject. Whilst, however, he indulged the hope that these delays would be abandoned, and that the rights of our citizens, which had been urged for so many years, would at length be taken up for examination, he learned with surprise and regret that His Majesty's Government had determined to insist that they should be discussed in connection with the question of the construction of the eighth article of the Louisiana treaty of cession. Against this determination he strongly but ineffectually remonstrated in a letter to Mr. De Villele, dated the 12th November, 1822.

It is notorious that the Government of the United States, whenever requested by that of His Majesty, have uniformly agreed to discuss any subject presented for their consideration, whether the object has been to obtain the redress of public or private injuries. Acting upon this principle, the question of the eighth article of the Louisiana treaty was, upon the suggestion of the minister of France, made the subject of a voluminous correspondence, in the course of which all the arguments of the parties respectively were fully made known to each other and examined. The result of this discussion has been a thorough conviction on the part of the Government of the United States that the construction of that article of the treaty contended for by France is destitute of any solid foundation and wholly inadmissible. After a discussion so full as to exhaust every argument on that question, the attempt to renew it in connection with the question of the claims of our citizens appeared to the Government of the United States to be a measure so contrary to the fair and regular course of examining controverted points between nations that they instructed Mr, Sheldon, their chargé d'affaires, to prepare and present a note explaining their views of the proceeding, which he delivered on the 11th of October, 1823. To this note no answer has ever been received.

I have the express instructions of the Government again to call the attention of that of His Majesty to this subject, and to insist that the claims of our citizens may continue to be discussed as a distinct question, without connecting it in any way with the construction of the Louisiana treaty. The two subjects are in every respect dissimilar. The difference in the nature and character of the two interests is such as to prevent them from being blended in the same discussion. The claims against France are of reparation to individuals for their property taken from them by undisputed wrong and injustice; the claim of France under the treaty is that of a right founded on a contract. In the examination of these questions the one can impart no light to the other; they are wholly unconnected, and ought on every principle to undergo a distinct and separate examination. To involve in the same investigation the indisputable rights of American citizens to indemnity for losses and the doubtful construction of a treaty can have no other effect than to occasion an indefinite postponement of the reparation due to individuals or a sacrifice on the part of the Government of the United States of a treaty stipulation in order to obtain that reparation. The United States would hope that such an alternative will not be pressed upon them by the Government of His Majesty.

Whilst I indulge a hope that the course to which I have objected will no longer be insisted on by His Majesty's ministers, permit me to renew to your excellency the sincere assurance that the United States earnestly desire that every subject of difference between the two countries should be amicably adjusted and all their relations placed upon the most friendly footing. Although they believe that any further discussion of the eighth article of the Louisiana treaty would be wholly unprofitable, they will be at all times ready to renew the discussion of that article or to examine any question which may remain to be adjusted between them and France.

I request your excellency to accept, etc.

JAMES BROWN.

[Extract of a letter (No. 3) from James Brown to the Secretary of State, dated Paris, May 11, 1824.]

I have the honor to inclose a copy of the answer of the minister of foreign affairs to the letter which I addressed to him on the 27th ultimo, upon the subject of the claims of our citizens against the French Government. You will perceive that no change has been made in the determination expressed to Mr. Gallatin of connecting in the same discussion the question on the eighth article of the Louisiana treaty of cession and the claims of the citizens of the United States against France. In expressing this resolution it has not been considered necessary even to notice the arguments made use of to induce them to adopt a different opinion.

Viscount Chateaubriand to Mr. Brown.

[Translation.]

PARIS, May 7, 1824.

SIR: The object of the letter which you did me the honor to address to me on the 28th of April is to recall the affair of American claims, already repeatedly called up by your predecessors, that they may be regulated by an arrangement between the two powers, and that in this negotiation the examination of the difficulties which were raised about the execution of the eighth article of the Louisiana treaty should not be included.

Although the claims made by France upon this last point be of a different nature from those of the Americans, yet no less attention ought to be paid to arrange both in a just and amicable manner.

Our claims upon the eighth article had already been laid before the Federal Government by His Majesty's plenipotentiary when he was negotiating the commercial convention of 24th June, 1822.

The negotiators not agreeing upon a subject so important, the King's Government did not wish this difficulty to suspend any longer the conclusion of an arrangement which might give more activity to commerce and multiply relations equally useful to the two powers. It reserves to itself the power of comprehending this object in another negotiation, and it does not renounce in any manner the claim which it urged.

It is for this reason, sir, that my predecessors and myself have constantly insisted that the arrangements to be made upon the eighth article of the Louisiana treaty should be made a part of those which your Government were desirous of making upon other questions still at issue.

It is the intention of His Majesty not to leave unsettled any subject of grave discussion between the two States, and the King is too well convinced of the friendly sentiments of your Government not to believe that the United States will be disposed to agree with France on all the points.

His Majesty authorizes me, sir, to declare to you that a negotiation will be opened with you upon the American claims if this negotiation should also include the French claims, and particularly the arrangements to be concluded concerning the execution of the eighth article of the Louisiana treaty.

Accept, sir, the assurances of the very distinguished consideration with which I have the honor to be, etc.,

CHATEAUBRIAND.

[Extracts of a letter (No. 4) from the Secretary of State to Mr. Brown, dated Department of State, Washington, August 14, 1824.]

The subject which has first claimed the attention of the President has been the result of your correspondence with the Viscount de Chateaubriand in relation to the claims of numerous citizens of the United States upon the justice of the French Government.

I inclose herewith a copy of the report of the Committee on Foreign Relations of the House of Representatives upon several petitions addressed to that body at their last session by some of those claimants and a resolution of the House adopted thereupon.

The President has deliberately considered the purport of M. de Chateaubriand's answer to your note of the 28th of April upon this subject, and he desires that you will renew with earnestness the application for indemnity to our citizens for claims notoriously just and resting upon the same principle with others which have been admitted and adjusted by the Government of France.

In the note of the Viscount de Chateaubriand to you of 7th May it is said that he is authorized to declare a negotiation will be opened with you upon the American claims if this negotiation should also include French claims, and particularly the arrangements to be concluded concerning the execution of the eighth article of the Louisiana treaty.

You are authorized in reply to declare that any just claims which subjects of France may have upon the Government of the United States will readily be included in the negotiation, and to stipulate any suitable provision for the examination, adjustment, and satisfaction of them.

But the question relating to the eighth article of the Louisiana treaty is not only of a different character—it can not be blended with that of indemnity for individual claims without a sacrifice on the part of the United States of a principle of right. The negotiation for indemnity presupposes that wrong has been done, that indemnity ought to be made, and the object of any treaty stipulation concerning it can only be to ascertain what is justly due and to make provision for the payment of it. By consenting to connect with such a negotiation that relating to the eighth article of the Louisiana convention the United States would abandon the principle upon which the whole discussion concerning it depends. The situation of the parties to the negotiation would be unequal. The United States, asking reparation for admitted wrong, are told that France will not discuss it with them unless they will first renounce their own sense of right to admit and discuss with it a claim the justice of which they have constantly denied.

The Government of the United States is prepared to renew the discussion with that of France relating to the eighth article of the Louisiana treaty in any manner which may be desired and by which they shall not be understood to admit that France has any claim under it whatever.

Mr. Brown to Mr. Adams (No. 12).

PARIS, August 12, 1824.

SIR: Some very unimportant changes have taken place in the composition of the ministry. The Baron de Damas, late minister of war, is now minister of foreign affairs; the Marquis de Clermont Tonnese is appointed to the department of war, and the Count Chabrol de Crousal to that of the marine.

These appointments are believed to correspond with the wishes of the president of the Council of Ministers, and do not inspire a hope that our claims will be more favorably attended to than they have been under the former administrations. The interpretation of the eighth article of the Louisiana treaty contended for by France will, I apprehend, be persisted in and all indemnity refused until it shall have been discussed and decided. After the correspondence which has already passed upon that article, it would appear that any further discussion upon it would be wholly unprofitable. With a view, however, of ascertaining the opinions of the minister of foreign affairs, I shall at an early day solicit a conference with him, and inform you of the result.

I have had the honor of receiving your letter recommending the claim of Mr. Kingston to my attention. The difficulties which that claim must experience, from its antiquity and from the operation of the treaty of 1803, can not have escaped your observation. It has also to encounter, in common with all our claims, the obstacle presented by the eighth article, which is found broad enough to be used as a shield to protect France, in the opinion of ministers, from the examination and adjustment of any claim which we can present.

I have the honor to be, with great respect, sir, your most obedient and humble servant,

JAMES BROWN.

Mr. Brown to Mr. Adams (No. 14).

PARIS, September 28, 1824.

SIR: Little has occurred of importance during the present month, except the death of the King. This event had been anticipated for nearly a year; he had declined gradually, and the affairs of the Government have been for some time almost wholly directed by Monsieur, who on his accession to the throne has declared that his reign would be only a continuation of that of the late King. No change in the policy of the Government is expected, and probably none in the composition of the ministry. The present King is satisfied with Mr. De Villele, who is at its head; and if any of its members should be changed the spirit in which public affairs are directed will not, it is believed, be affected by that circumstance.

The ceremonies attending the change of the Crown have principally occupied the public attention for the last fortnight. It will, I presume, be officially announced by the French minister at Washington, and, according to the forms observed here, will, I understand, require fresh letters of credence for all foreign ministers at this Court, addressed to the new King.

My health has not permitted me (having been confined for some weeks to the bed by a rheumatic affection) to confer with the Baron de Damas on our affairs since his appointment as minister of the foreign department. I should regret this the more if I were not satisfied that the same impulse will direct the decisions of the Government upon these points now as before he had this department in charge, and that no favorable change in those decisions can be expected from any personal influence which might be exerted by the new minister. I shall, however, take the earliest opportunity that my health will allow to mention the subject to him and ascertain what his views of it are.

I have the honor to be, with great respect, sir, your most obedient and humble servant.

JAMES BROWN.

[Extracts of a letter from Mr. James Brown to Mr, Adams (No. 16).]

PARIS, October 23, 1824.

The packet ship which sailed from New York on the 1st of September brought me the letter which you did me the honor to address to me on the 14th of August.

In conformity with the instructions contained in that letter, I have addressed one to the Baron de Damas, minister of foreign affairs, a copy of which I now inclose. I expect to receive his answer in time to be sent by the packet which will sail from Havre on the 1st of next month, in which event it may probably reach Washington about the 15th of December.

The recent changes which have been made in the ministry, of which I have already informed you, do not justify any very strong expectation that a change of measures in relation to our affairs at this Court will follow. The same individuals fill different places in the ministry from those which they formerly held, but in all probability adhere to their former opinions in relation to the subjects of discussion between the United States and France. On the point to which my letter to the Baron de Damas particularly relates the Count de Villele has already given his deliberate views in his letters to Mr. Gallatin dated 6th and 15th November, 1822, and I have every reason to believe that they remain unchanged. Having bestowed much attention on the subject, it is probable his opinion will be in a great measure decisive as to the answer which shall be given to my letter. It is the opinion of many well-informed men that in the course of a few months important changes will be made in the composition of the ministry. As these changes, however, will proceed from causes wholly unconnected with foreign affairs, I am by no means sanguine in my expectations that under any new composition of the ministry we may hope for a change of policy as it relates to our claims. The eighth article of the Louisiana treaty will be continually put forward as a bar to our claims and its adjustment urged as often as we renew our claim for indemnity.

The Journal des Débats of this morning states that at a superior council of commerce and of the colonies at which His Majesty yesterday presided Mr. De St. Cricq, president of the bureau de commerce, made a report on the commercial convention of the 24th June, 1822, between the United States and France.

Mr. Brown to Baron de Damas.

PARIS, October 22, 1824.

His Excellency BARON DE DAMAS,
Minister of Foreign Affairs, etc.

SIR: I availed myself of the earliest opportunity to transmit to my Government a copy of the letter which I had the honor to address to the Viscount de Chateaubriand on the 28th day of April last, together with a copy of his answer to that letter, dated 7th of May.

After a candid and deliberate consideration of the subject of that correspondence, my Government has sent me recent instructions to renew with earnestness the application, already so frequently and so ineffectually made, for indemnity to our citizens for claims notoriously just, and resting on the same principles with others which have been admitted and adjusted by the Government of France.

In reply to that part of the Viscount de Chateaubriand's letter in which he offers to open with me a negotiation upon American claims if that negotiation should also include French claims, and particularly the arrangements to be concluded concerning the eighth article of the Louisiana treaty, I have been instructed to declare that any just claims which the subjects of France may have upon the Government of the United States will readily be embraced in the negotiation, and that I am authorized to stipulate any suitable provision for the examination, adjustment, and satisfaction of them.

The question relating to the eighth article of the Louisiana treaty is viewed by my Government as one of a very different character. It can not be blended with that of indemnity for individual claims without a sacrifice on the part of the United States of a principle of right. Every negotiation for indemnity necessarily presupposes that some wrong has been done, and that indemnity ought to be made; and the object of every treaty stipulation respecting it can only be to ascertain the extent of the injury, and to make provision for its adequate reparation. This is precisely the nature of the negotiation for American claims which has been for so many years the subject of discussion between the Governments of the United States and of France. The wrongs done to our citizens have never been denied, whilst their right to indemnity has been established by acts done by the French Government in cases depending upon the same principles under which they derive their claim. By consenting to connect with such a negotiation that relating to the eighth article of the Louisiana treaty the United States would abandon the principle upon which the whole discussion depends. When asking for reparation for acknowledged wrong the United States have been told that France will not discuss it with them unless they will first renounce their own sense of right and admit and discuss in connection with it a claim the justice of which they have hitherto constantly denied. In any negotiation commenced under such circumstances the situation of the parties would be unequal. By consenting to connect the pretensions of France under the eighth article of the Louisiana treaty with claims for indemnity for acknowledged injustice and injury the United States would be understood as admitting that those pretensions were well founded; that wrong had been done to France for which reparation ought to be made. The Government of the United States, not having yet been convinced that this is the case, can not consent to any arrangement which shall imply an admission so contrary to their deliberate sense of right.

I am authorized and prepared on behalf of the United States to enter upon a further discussion of the eighth article of the Louisiana treaty in any manner which may be desired, and by which they shall not be understood previously to admit that the construction of that article claimed by France is well founded; and also to renew the separate negotiation for American claims, embracing at the same time all just claims winch French subjects may have upon the Government of the United States.

The change which has lately taken place in His Majesty's department of foreign affairs encourages the hope that this important subject will be candidly reconsidered; that the obstacles which have arrested the progress of the negotiation may be removed, and that the subjects of contestation between the two Governments may be ultimately adjusted upon such principles as may perpetuate the good understanding and harmony which have so long subsisted between the United States and France.

Should I, however, be disappointed in the result of this application, it is to be seriously apprehended that as the United States have not hitherto seen in the course of the discussion any just claim of France arising from the eighth article of the Louisiana treaty, so in the persevering refusal of the French Government to discuss and adjust the well-founded claims of citizens of the United States to indemnity for wrongs unless in connection with one which they are satisfied is unfounded the United States will ultimately perceive only a determination to deny justice to the claimants.

Permit me respectfully to request that at as early a day as your convenience will allow your excellency will favor me with an answer to this letter.

I embrace with pleasure this occasion to offer to your excellency the renewed assurance, etc.,

JAMES BROWN.

WASHINGTON, December 24, 1824.

To the House of Representatives of the United States:

In compliance with a resolution of the House of Representatives of the 23d December, 1823, requesting that a negotiation should be opened with the British Government "for the cession of so much land on the island of Abaco at or near the Hole-in-the-Wall, and on such other places within the acknowledged dominions of that power on the islands, keys, or shoals of the Bahama Banks as may be necessary for the erection and support of light-houses, beacons, buoys, or floating lights for the security of navigation over or near the said banks, and to be used solely for that purpose," directions were given to the minister of the United States at London on the 1st of January, 1824, to communicate the purport of that resolution to the Government of Great Britain with a view to their acceding to the wish of this; and I transmit to the House copies of Mr. Rush's correspondence upon this subject, communicating the result of his application to the British Government.

JAMES MONROE.

WASHINGTON, December 28, 1824.

To the House of Representatives of the United States:

In compliance with a resolution of the House of Representatives of the 27th instant, requesting information explanatory of the character and objects of the visit of the naval officer of the United States commanding in the West Indies to the town of Faxyardo, in the island of Porto Rico, on the —— day of November last, I herewith transmit a report of the Secretary of the Navy, with a letter from Commodore Porter, which contains all the information in possession of the Executive on the subject.

Deeming the transactions adverted to of high importance, an order has been sent to Commodore Porter to repair hither without delay, that all the circumstances connected therewith may be fully investigated.

JAMES MONROE.

WASHINGTON, January 5, 1825.

To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States:

As the term of my service in this high trust will expire at the end of the present session of Congress, I think it proper to invite your attention to an object very interesting to me, and which in the movement of our Government is deemed on principle equally interesting to the public. I have been long in the service of my country and in its most difficult conjunctures, as well abroad as at home, in the course of which I have had a control over the public moneys to a vast amount. If in the course of my service it shall appear on the most severe scrutiny, which I invite, that the public have sustained any loss by any act of mine, or of others for which I ought to be held responsible, I am willing to bear it. If, on the other hand, it shall appear on a view of the law and of precedents in other cases that justice has been withheld from me in any instance, as I have believed it to be in many, and greatly to my injury, it is submitted whether it ought not to be rendered. It is my wish that all matters of account and claims between my country and myself be settled with that strict regard to justice which is observed in settlements between individuals in private life. It would be gratifying to me, and it appears to be just, that the subject should be now examined in both respects with a view to a decision hereafter. No bill would, it is presumed, be presented for my signature which would operate either for or against me, and I would certainly sanction none in my favor. While here I can furnish testimony, applicable to any case, in both views, which a full investigation may require, and the committee to whom the subject may be referred, by reporting facts now with a view to a decision after my retirement, will allow time for further information and due consideration of all matters relating thereto. Settlements with a person in this trust, which could not be made with the accounting officers of the Government, should always be made by Congress and before the public. The cause of the delay in presenting these claims will be explained to the committee to whom the subject may be referred. It will, I presume, be made apparent that it was inevitable; that from the peculiar circumstances attending each case Congress alone could decide on it, and that from considerations of delicacy it would have been highly improper for me to have sought it from Congress at an earlier period than that which is now proposed—the expiration of my term in this high trust.

Other considerations appear to me to operate with great force in favor of the measure which I now propose. A citizen who has long served his country in its highest trusts has a right, if he has served with fidelity, to enjoy undisturbed tranquillity and peace in his retirement. This he can not expect to do unless his conduct in all pecuniary concerns shall be placed by severe scrutiny on a basis not to be shaken. This, therefore, forms a strong motive with me for the inquiry which I now invite. The public may also derive considerable advantage from the precedent in the future movement of the Government. It being known that such scrutiny was made in my case, it may form a new and strong barrier against the abuse of the public confidence in future.

JAMES MONROE.

WASHINGTON, January 10, 1825.

To the House of Representatives of the United States:

I should hasten to communicate to you the documents called for by the resolution of the House of Representatives of the 4th instant, relating to the conduct of the officers of the Navy of the United States on the Pacific Ocean and of other public agents in South America, if such a communication might now be made consistently with the public interest or with justice to the parties concerned. In consequence of several charges which have been alleged against Commodore Stewart, touching his conduct while commanding the squadron of the United States on that sea, it has been deemed proper to suspend him from duty and to subject him to trial on these charges. It appearing also that some of those charges have been communicated to the Department by Mr. Prevost, political agent at this time of the United States at Peru, and heretofore at Buenos Ayres and Chile, and apparently with his sanction, and that charges have likewise been made against him by citizens of the United States engaged in commerce in that quarter, it has been thought equally just and proper that he should attend here, as well to furnish the evidence in his possession applicable to the charges exhibited against Commodore Stewart as to answer such as have been exhibited against himself.

In this stage the publication of those documents might tend to excite prejudices which might operate to the injury of both. It is important that the public servants in every station should perform their duty with fidelity, according to the injunctions of the law and the orders of the Executive in fulfillment thereof. It is peculiarly so that this should be done by the commanders of our squadrons, especially on distant seas, and by political agents who represent the United States with foreign powers, for reasons that are obvious in both instances. It is due to their rights and to the character of the Government that they be not censured without just cause, which can not be ascertained until, on a view of tho charges, they are heard in their defense, and after a thorough and impartial investigation of their conduct. Under these circumstances it is thought that a communication at this time of those documents would not comport with the public interest nor with what is due to the parties concerned.

JAMES MONROE.

WASHINGTON, January 13, 1825.

To the Senate of the United States:

In compliance with two resolutions of the Senate, the first of the 21st and the second of the 23d December last, requesting information respecting the injuries which have been sustained by our citizens by piratical depredations, and other details connected therewith, and requesting also information of the measures which have been adopted for the suppression of piracy, and whether in the opinion of the Executive it will not be necessary to adopt other means for the accomplishment of the object, and, in that event, what other means it will be most advisable to recur to, I herewith transmit a report from the Secretary of State, and likewise a report from the Secretary of the Navy, with the documents referred to in each.

On the very important question submitted to the Executive as to the necessity of recurring to other more effectual means for the suppression of a practice so destructive of the lives and property of our citizens, I have to observe that three expedients occur—one by the pursuit of the offenders to the settled as well as the unsettled parts of the island from whence they issue, another by reprisal on the property of the inhabitants, and a third by the blockade of the ports of those islands. It will be obvious that neither of these measures can be resorted to in a spirit of amity with Spain otherwise than in a firm belief that neither the Government of Spain nor the government of either of the islands has the power to suppress that atrocious practice, and that the United States interposed their aid for the accomplishment of an object which is of equal importance to them as well as to us. Acting on this principle, the facts which justify the proceeding being universally known and felt by all engaged in commerce in that sea, it may fairly be presumed that neither will the Government of Spain nor the government of either of those islands complain of a resort to either of those measures, or to all of them, should such resort be necessary. It is therefore suggested that a power commensurate with either resource be granted to the Executive, to be exercised according to his discretion and as circumstances may imperiously require. It is hoped that the manifestation of a policy so decisive will produce the happiest result; that it will rid these seas and this hemisphere of this practice. This hope is strengthened by the belief that the Government of Spain and the governments of the islands, particularly of Cuba, whose chief is known here, will faithfully cooperate in such measures as may be necessary for the accomplishment of this very important object. To secure such cooperation will be the earnest desire and, of course, the zealous and persevering effort of the Executive.

JAMES MONROE.

WASHINGTON, January 17, 1825.

To the Senate of the United States:

I transmit to the Senate, for its advice and consent as to the ratification, a treaty which has been concluded by a commissioner duly authorized for the purpose with the Quapaw Indians in Arkansas for the cession of their claim to the lands in that Territory. I transmit also a report from the Secretary of War, with other documents, relating to this subject.

JAMES MONROE.

JANUARY 17, 1825.

To the Senate of the United States:

Agreeably to the resolution of the Senate of 19th May last, requesting the President to cause to be laid before the Senate a report "shewing the amount of duties which shall have accrued on importations into the United States for the three quarters of a year ending June 30, 1824; also the amount of duties which would have accrued on the same importations at such higher rates of duty as may be imposed by any act of the present session of Congress," I herewith transmit a report from the Secretary of the Treasury, which contains the information required.

JAMES MONROE.

WASHINGTON, January 18, 1825.

To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States:

I communicate herewith to both Houses of Congress copies of the convention between the United States and His Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, concluded at St. Petersburg on the 5th (17th) of April last, which has been duly ratified on both sides, and the ratifications of which were exchanged on the 11th instant.

JAMES MONROE.

WASHINGTON, January 20, 1825.

To the House of Representatives of the United States:

In compliance with a resolution of the House of Representatives of the 19th of December, 1822, requesting the President to communicate "what progress has been made in the execution of the act of the last session entitled 'An act to abolish the Indian trading establishments,' with a report from the factories, respectively, as the same may be made to him," I herewith transmit a report from the Secretary of the Treasury, with documents, which contains the information requested.

JAMES MONROE.

WASHINGTON, January 27, 1825.

To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States:

Being deeply impressed with the opinion that the removal of the Indian tribes from the lands which they now occupy within the limits of the several States and Territories to the country lying westward and northward thereof, within our acknowledged boundaries, is of very high importance to our Union, and may be accomplished on conditions and in a manner to promote the interest and happiness of those tribes, the attention of the Government has been long drawn with great solicitude to the object. For the removal of the tribes within the limits of the State of Georgia the motive has been peculiarly strong, arising from the compact with that State whereby the United States are bound to extinguish the Indian title to the lands within it whenever it may be done peaceably and on reasonable conditions. In the fulfillment of this compact, I have thought that the United States should act with a generous spirit; that they should omit nothing which should comport with a liberal construction of the instrument and likewise be in accordance with the just rights of those tribes. From the view which I have taken of the subject I am satisfied that in the discharge of these important duties in regard to both the parties alluded to the United States will have to encounter no conflicting interests with either. On the contrary, that the removal of the tribes from the territory which they now inhabit to that which was designated in the message at the commencement of the session, which would accomplish the object for Georgia, under a well-digested plan for their government and civilization, which should be agreeable to themselves, would not only shield them from impending ruin, but promote their welfare and happiness. Experience has clearly demonstrated that in their present state it is impossible to incorporate them in such masses, in any form whatever, into our system. It has also demonstrated with equal certainty that without a timely anticipation of and provision against the dangers to which they are exposed, under causes which it will be difficult, if not impossible, to control, their degradation and extermination will be inevitable.

The great object to be accomplished is the removal of these tribes to the territory designated on conditions which shall be satisfactory to themselves and honorable to the United States. This can be done only by conveying to each tribe a good title to an adequate portion of land to which it may consent to remove, and by providing for it there a system of internal government which shall protect their property from invasion, and, by the regular progress of improvement and civilization, prevent that degeneracy which has generally marked the transition from the one to the other state.

I transmit herewith a report from the Secretary of War, which presents the best estimate which can be formed, from the documents in that Department, of the number of Indians within our States and Territories and of the amount of lands held by the several tribes within each; of the state of the country lying northward and westward thereof, within our acknowledged boundaries; of the parts to which the Indian title has already been extinguished, and of the conditions on which other parts, in an amount which may be adequate to the object contemplated, may be obtained. By this report it appears that the Indian title has already been extinguished to extensive tracts in that quarter, and that other portions maybe acquired to the extent desired on very moderate conditions. Satisfied I also am that the removal proposed is not only practicable, but that the advantages attending it to the Indians may be made so apparent to them that all the tribes, even those most opposed, may be induced to accede to it at no very distant day.

The digest of such a government, with the consent of the Indians, which should be endowed with sufficient power to meet all the objects contemplated—to connect the several tribes together in a bond of amity and preserve order in each; to prevent intrusions on their property; to teach them by regular instruction the arts of civilized life and make them a civilized people—is an object of very high importance. It is the powerful consideration which we have to offer to these tribes as an inducement to relinquish the lands on which they now reside and to remove to those which are designated. It is not doubted that this arrangement will present considerations of sufficient force to surmount all their prejudices in favor of the soil of their nativity, however strong they may be. Their elders have sufficient intelligence to discern the certain progress of events in the present train, and sufficient virtue, by yielding to momentary sacrifices, to protect their families and posterity from inevitable destruction. They will also perceive that they may thus attain an elevation to which as communities they could not otherwise aspire.

To the United States the proposed arrangement offers many important advantages in addition to those which have been already enumerated. By the establishment of such a government over these tribes with their consent we become in reality their benefactors. The relation of conflicting interests which has heretofore existed between them and our frontier settlements will cease. There will be no more wars between them and the United States. Adopting such a government, their movement will be in harmony with us, and its good effect be felt throughout the whole extent of our territory to the Pacific. It may fairly be presumed that, through the agency of such a government, the condition of all the tribes inhabiting that vast region may be essentially improved; that permanent peace may be preserved with them, and our commerce be much extended.

With a view to this important object I recommend it to Congress to adopt, by solemn declaration, certain fundamental principles in accord with those above suggested, as the basis of such arrangements as may be entered into with the several tribes, to the strict observance of which the faith of the nation shall be pledged, I recommend it also to Congress to provide by law for the appointment of a suitable number of commissioners who shall, under the direction of the President, be authorized to visit and explain to the several tribes the objects of the Government, and to make with them, according to their instructions, such arrangements as shall be best calculated to carry those objects into effect.

A negotiation is now depending with the Creek Nation for the cession of lands held by it within the limits of Georgia, and with a reasonable prospect of success. It is presumed, however, that the result will not be known during the present session of Congress. To give effect to this negotiation and to the negotiations which it is proposed to hold with all the other tribes within the limits of the several States and Territories on the principles and for the purposes stated, it is recommended that an adequate appropriation be now made by Congress.

JAMES MONROE.

WASHINGTON, January 27, 1825.

To the Senate of the United States:

I transmit to the Senate a treaty concluded in this city with a deputation from the Choctaw Indians, accompanied with the report from the Secretary of War, with a copy of the correspondence connected with the negotiations, for the advice and consent of the Senate.

JAMES MONROE.

WASHINGTON, February 2, 1825.

To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States:

I communicate herewith to both Houses of Congress copies of the alterations in the treaty of peace and friendship of August, 1797, between the United States and the Bashaw Bey of Tunis, concluded at the Palace of Bardo, near Tunis, on the 24th of February last, and of treaties between the United States and the Sock and Fox tribes of Indians and the Ioway tribe of Indians, concluded at the city of Washington on the 4th of August last, which have been duly ratified.

JAMES MONROE.

WASHINGTON, February 4, 1825.

The PRESIDENT PRO TEMPORE OF THE SENATE:

It appearing by certain provisions contained in a late act of the general assembly of Virginia, entitled "An act incorporating the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal Company," that the assent of Congress will be necessary to carry the said act into effect, I herewith transmit a copy thereof, that it may be considered with a view to the object contemplated.

JAMES MONROE.

[The same message was sent to the House of Representatives.]

WASHINGTON, February 7, 1825.

To the House of Representatives of the United States:

I transmit herewith to the House a report from the Secretary of State, with copies of the correspondence relating to the claims of the citizens of the United States upon the Government of the Netherlands, requested by a resolution of the House of the 18th of January last.

JAMES MONROE.

WASHINGTON, February 11, 1825.

To the House of Representatives of the United States:

In compliance with a resolution of the House of Representatives of January 5, I herewith transmit a report from the Secretary of the Navy, with copies of the proceedings of the courts-martial in the cases of Lieutenants Weaver and Conner.

JAMES MONROE.

WASHINGTON, February 14, 1825.

To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States:

I herewith transmit a report from the Secretary of War, with a report to him by the Chief Engineer, of the examination which has been made by the Board of Engineers for Internal Improvement, in obedience to their instructions, of the country between the Potomac and Ohio rivers, between the latter and Lake Erie, between the Allegheny and Schuylkill rivers, the Delaware and the Raritan, between Buzzards and Barnstable bays, and the Narraganset roads and Boston Harbor, with explanatory observations on each route. From the view which I have taken of these reports I contemplate results of incalculable advantage to our Union, because I see in them the most satisfactory proof that certain impediments which had a tendency to embarrass the intercourse between some of its most important sections may be removed without serious difficulty, and that facilities may be afforded in other quarters which will have the happiest effect. Of the right in Congress to promote these great results by the appropriation of the public money, in harmony with the States to be affected by them, having already communicated my sentiments fully and on mature consideration, I deem it unnecessary to enlarge at this time.

JAMES MONROE.

WASHINGTON, February 16, 1825.

To the House of Representatives of the United States:

I transmit to the House of Representatives a report from the Secretary of State, containing the information called for by their resolution of the 1st of this month, touching the capture and detention of American fishermen during the last season.

JAMES MONROE.

WASHINGTON, February 17, 1825.

To the House of Representatives of the United States:

I herewith transmit to the House a report from the Secretary of State, with copies of the correspondence with the Government of France, requested by the resolution of the House of the 25th of January last.

JAMES MONROE.

WASHINGTON, February 17, 1825.

To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States:

I invite the attention of Congress to the peculiar situation of this District in regard to the exposure of its inhabitants to contagious diseases from abroad, against which it is thought that adequate provision should now be made. The exposure being common to the whole District, the regulation should apply to the whole, to make which Congress alone possesses the adequate power. That the regulation should be made by Congress is the more necessary from the consideration that this being the seat of the Government, its protection against such diseases must form one of its principal objects.

JAMES MONROE.

WASHINGTON, February 21, 1825.

To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States:

I transmit herewith a report from the Secretary of War, with a report to him from the Third Auditor, of the settlement in the amount stated of the claims of the State of Massachusetts for services rendered by the militia of that State in the late war, the payment of which has hitherto been prevented by causes which are well known to Congress. Having communicated my sentiments on this subject fully in a message bearing date on the 23d of February, 1824, it is unnecessary to repeat in detail here what I there advanced. By recurring to that message and to the documents referred to in it it will be seen that the conduct of the executive of that State in refusing to place the militia thereof at that difficult conjuncture under the direction of the Executive of the United States, as it was bound to do by a fair construction of the Constitution, and as the other States did, is the great cause to which the difficulty adverted to is to be ascribed. It will also be seen on a view of those documents that the executive of the State was warned at the time if it persevered in the refusal that the consequences which have followed would be inevitable; that the attitude assumed by the State formed a case which was not contemplated by the existing laws of the United States relating to militia services; that the payment of the claims of the State for such services could be provided for by Congress only and by a special law for the purpose. Having made this communication while acting in the Department of War to the governor of Massachusetts, with the sanction and under the direction of my enlightened and virtuous predecessor, it would be improper in any view which may be taken of the subject for me to change the ground then assumed, to withdraw this great question from the consideration of Congress, and to act on it myself. Had the Executive been in error, it is entitled to censure, making a just allowance for the motive which guided it. If its conduct was correct, the ground then assumed ought to be maintained by it. It belongs to Congress alone to terminate this distressing incident on just principles, with a view to the highest interests of our Union.

From the view which I have taken of the subject I am confirmed in the opinion that Congress should now decide on the claim and allow to the State such portions thereof as are founded on the principles laid down in the former message. If those principles are correct, as on great consideration I am satisfied they are, it appears to me to be just in itself and of high importance that the sums which may be due in conformity therewith should no longer be withheld from the State.

JAMES MONROE.

WASHINGTON, February 21, 1825.

The PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE PRO TEMPORE:

I transmit to the Senate a convention, signed by the plenipotentiaries of the United States and of the Republic of Colombia at Bogota on the 10th of December, 1824, together with the documents appertaining to the negotiation of the same, for the constitutional consideration of the Senate with regard to its ratification,

JAMES MONROE.

WASHINGTON, February 21, 1825.

The PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE PRO TEMPORE:

I transmit to the Senate a convention of general peace, amity, navigation, and commerce, signed by the plenipotentiaries of the United States and of the Republic of Colombia at Bogota on the 3d of October, 1824, together with the documents appertaining to the negotiation of the same, for the constitutional consideration of the Senate with regard to its ratification.

JAMES MONROE.

WASHINGTON, February 23, 1825.

To the House of Representatives:

I transmit to the House of Representatives a further report from the Secretary of State, in pursuance of their resolution of the 1st instant, with the papers to which it refers, upon the subject of the capture and detention of American fishermen the past season in the Bay of Fundy.

JAMES MONROE.

WASHINGTON, February 25, 1825.

To the Senate and House of Representatives:

I communicate herewith to both Houses of Congress copies of the treaties between the United States and the Quapaw Nation of Indians, concluded at Harringtons, in the Territory of Arkansas, on the 15th day of November last, and between the United States and the Choctaw Nation of Indians, concluded at the city of Washington on the 20th day of January last, which have been duly ratified.

JAMES MONROE.

WASHINGTON, February 26, 1825.

To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States:

Just before the termination of the last session an act entitled "An act concerning wrecks on the coast of Florida," which then passed, was presented to me with many others and approved, and, as I thought, signed. A report to that effect was then made to Congress. It appeared, however, after the adjournment that the evidence of such approbation had not been attached to it. Whether the act may be considered in force under such circumstances is a point on which it belongs not to me to decide. To remove all doubt on the subject, I submit to the consideration of Congress the propriety of passing a declaratory act to that effect.

JAMES MONROE.

WASHINGTON, February 28, 1825.

To the Senate of the United States:

I transmit to the Senate, for the exercise of its constitutional power, a treaty lately concluded at the Indian Springs, by commissioners of the United States duly authorized, with the chiefs of the Creek Nation, assembled there in council, with the documents connected therewith.

JAMES MONROE.