The eleventh section simply assumes to confer discretionary powers upon the Executive. Without the law I have no hesitation to go as far in the direction indicated as I may at any time deem expedient. And I am ready to say now, I think it is proper for our military commanders to employ as laborers as many persons of African descent as can be used to advantage.

The twelfth and thirteenth sections are somewhat better than objectionable, and the fourteenth is entirely proper if all other parts of the act shall stand.

That to which I chiefly object pervades most parts of the act, but more distinctly appears in the first, second, seventh, and eighth sections. It is the sum of those provisions which results in the divesting of title forever. For the causes of treason and the ingredients of treason not amounting to the full crime it declares forfeiture extending beyond the lives of the guilty parties, whereas the Constitution of the United States declares that "no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted." True, there seems to be no formal attainder in this case; still, I think the greater punishment can not be constitutionally inflicted in a different form for the same offense. With great respect I am constrained to say I think this feature of the act is unconstitutional. It would not be difficult to modify it.

I may remark that this provision of the Constitution, put in language borrowed from Great Britain, applies only in this country to real or landed estate.

Again, this act, by proceedings in rem, forfeits property for the ingredients of treason without a conviction of the supposed criminal or a personal hearing given him in any proceeding. That we may not touch property lying within our reach because we can not give personal notice to an owner who is absent endeavoring to destroy the Government is certainly not very satisfactory. Still, the owner may not be thus engaged; and I think a reasonable time should be provided for such parties to appear and have personal hearings. Similar provisions are not uncommon in connection with proceedings in rem.

For the reasons stated, I return the bill to the House, in which it originated.

JULY 17, 1862.

Fellow-Citizens of the Senate and House of Representatives:

I have inadvertently omitted so long to inform you that in March last Mr. Cornelius Vanderbilt, of New York, gratuitously presented to the United States the ocean steamer Vanderbilt, by many esteemed the finest merchant ship in the world. She has ever since been and still is doing valuable service to the Government. For the patriotic act in making this magnificent and valuable present to the country, I recommend that some suitable acknowledgment be made.

ABRAHAM LINCOLN.