To the House of Representatives of the United States:
I submit for the consideration of Congress the accompanying communication from A. Pageot, minister plenipotentiary ad interim of the King of the French, upon the subject of the tonnage duties levied on French vessels coming into the ports of the United States from the islands of St. Pierre and Miquelon, and proposing to place our commercial intercourse with those islands upon the same footing as now exists with the islands of Martinique and Guadaloupe, as regulated by the acts of the 9th of May, 1828, and of the 13th of July, 1832. No reason is perceived for the discrimination recognized by the existing law, and none why the provisions of the acts of Congress referred to should not be extended to the commerce of the islands in question.
JOHN TYLER.
WASHINGTON, March 27, 1844.
To the Senate:
I transmit herewith a communication from the Secretary of the Treasury, to whom I had referred the resolution of the Senate of the 27th December last, showing that the information[115] called for by that resolution can not be furnished from authentic data.
JOHN TYLER.
WASHINGTON, D.C., April 9, 1844.
To the House of Representatives:
In compliance with a resolution of the House of Representatives of the 23d of March last, requesting the President to lay before the House "the authority and the true copies of all requests and applications upon which he deemed it his duty to interfere with the naval and military forces of the United States on the occasion of the recent attempt of the people of Rhode Island to establish a free constitution in the place of the old charter government of that State; also copies of the instructions to and statements of the charter commissioners sent to him by the then existing authorities of the State of Rhode Island; also copies of the correspondence between the Executive of the United States and the charter government of the State of Rhode Island, and all the papers and documents connected with the same; also copies of the correspondence, if any, between the heads of Departments and said charter government or any person or persons connected with the said government, and of any accompanying papers and documents; also copies of all orders issued by the Executive of the United States, or any of the Departments, to military officers for the movement or employment of troops to or in Rhode Island; also copies of all orders to naval officers to prepare steam or other vessels of the United States for service in the waters of Rhode Island; also copies of all orders to the officers of revenue cutters for the same service; also copies of any instructions borne by the Secretary of War to Rhode Island on his visit in 1842 to review the troops of the charter government; also copies of any order or orders to any officer or officers of the Army or Navy to report themselves to the charter government; and that he be requested to lay before this House copies of any other papers or documents in the possession of the Executive connected with this subject not above specifically enumerated," I have to inform the House that the Executive did not deem it his "duty to interfere with the naval and military forces of the United States" in the late disturbances in Rhode Island; that no orders were issued by the Executive or any of the Departments to military officers for the movement or employment of troops to or in Rhode Island other than those which accompany this message and which contemplated the strengthening of the garrison at Fort Adams, which, considering the extent of the agitation in Rhode Island, was esteemed necessary and judicious; that no orders were issued to naval officers to prepare steam or other vessels of the United States for service in the waters of Rhode Island; that no orders were issued "to the officers of the revenue cutters for said service;" that no instructions were borne by "the Secretary of War to Rhode Island on his visit in 1842 to review the troops of the charter government;" that no orders were given to any officer or officers of the Army or Navy to report themselves to the charter government; that "requests and applications" were made to the Executive to fulfill the guaranties of the Constitution which impose on the Federal Government the obligation to protect and defend each State of the Union against "domestic violence and foreign invasion," but the Executive was at no time convinced that the casus foederis had arisen which required the interposition of the military or naval power in the controversy which unhappily existed between the people of Rhode Island. I was in no manner prevented from so interfering by the inquiry whether Rhode Island existed as an independent State of the Union under a charter granted at an early period by the Crown of Great Britain or not. It was enough for the Executive to know that she was recognized as a sovereign State by Great Britain by the treaty of 1783; that at a later day she had in common with her sister States poured out her blood and freely expended her treasure in the War of the Revolution; that she was a party to the Articles of Confederation; that at an after period she adopted the Constitution of the United States as a free, independent, and republican State; and that in this character she has always possessed her full quota of representation in the Senate and House of Representatives; and that up to a recent day she has conducted all her domestic affairs and fulfilled all her obligations as a member of the Union, in peace and war, under her charter government, as it is denominated by the resolution of the House of the 23d March. I must be permitted to disclaim entirely and unqualifiedly the right on the part of the Executive to make any real or supposed defects existing in any State constitution or form of government the pretext for a failure to enforce the laws or the guaranties of the Constitution of the United States in reference to any such State. I utterly repudiate the idea, in terms as emphatic as I can employ, that those laws are not to be enforced or those guaranties complied with because the President may believe that the right of suffrage or any other great popular right is either too restricted or too broadly enlarged. I also with equal strength resist the idea that it falls within the Executive competency to decide in controversies of the nature of that which existed in Rhode Island on which side is the majority of the people or as to the extent of the rights of a mere numerical majority. For the Executive to assume such a power would be to assume a power of the most dangerous character. Under such assumptions the States of this Union would have no security for peace or tranquillity, but might be converted into the mere instruments of Executive will. Actuated by selfish purposes, he might become the great agitator, fomenting assaults upon the State constitutions and declaring the majority of to-day to be the minority of to-morrow, and the minority, in its turn, the majority, before whose decrees the established order of things in the State should be subverted. Revolution, civil commotion, and bloodshed would be the inevitable consequences. The provision in the Constitution intended for the security of the States would thus be turned into the instrument of their destruction. The President would become, in fact, the great constitution maker for the States, and all power would be vested in his hands.