To the House of Representatives: WASHINGTON, February 20, 1867. I transmit a report from the Secretary of State, giving information of States which have ratified the amendment to the Constitution proposed by the Thirty-ninth Congress in addition to those named in his report which was communicated in my message of the 16th instant, in answer to a resolution of the House of Representatives of the 15th instant. ANDREW JOHNSON. WASHINGTON, February 21, 1867. To the Senate of the United States: WASHINGTON, February 21, 1867. To the Senate of the United States: WASHINGTON, February 21, 1867. To the Senate of the United States: To the House of Representatives: WASHINGTON, February 21, 1867. I transmit to the House of Representatives, in answer to their resolution of the 14th instant, a report § from the Secretary of State of this date. ANDREW JOHNSON. WASHINGTON, February 21, 1867. To the Senate of the United States: *Correspondence relative to the refusal of the United States consul at Cadiz, Spain, to certify invoices of wines shipped from that port, etc. + Correspondence with foreign ministers of the United States relative to the policy of the Presi dent toward the States lately in rebellion. Correspondence relative to the salary of the United States minister to Portugal. Stating that the correspondence relative to the refusal of the United States consul at Cadiz, Spain, to certify invoices of wines shipped from that port had been sent to the Senate. For the purpose of concluding a new treaty. York Indians in Kansas and submitted to the Senate in the month of WASHINGTON CITY, D. C., February 23, 1867. To the Senate of the United States: I herewith lay before the Senate, for its constitutional action thereon, a treaty concluded in the city of Washington on the 19th of February, 1867, between the United States and the Sac and Fox tribes of Indians of Missouri. A letter of the Secretary of the Interior of the 23d and copy of a letter of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs of the 19th of February, 1867, accompany the treaty. ANDREW JOHNSON. WASHINGTON CITY, D. C., February 23, 1867. To the Senate of the United States: I herewith lay before the Senate, for its constitutional action thereon, a treaty concluded in the city of Washington on the 18th February, 1867, between the United States and the Sac and Fox tribes of Indians of the Mississippi. A letter of the Secretary of the Interior of the 23d and a copy of a letter of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs of the 19th February, 1867, accompany the treaty. ANDREW JOHNSON. WASHINGTON CITY, D. C., February 23, 1867. To the Senate of the United States: I herewith lay before the Senate, for its constitutional action thereon, a treaty concluded on the 19th February, 1867, between the United States and the Sisseton and Wahpeton bands of Indians. A letter of the Secretary of the Interior of the 23d instant and accompanying copies of letters of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs and Major T. R. Brown, in relation to said treaty, are also herewith transmitted. ANDREW JOHNSON. WASHINGTON, February 23, 1867. To the Senate and House of Representatives: I transmit a copy of a letter of the 12th instant addressed to me by His Excellency Lucius Fairchild, governor of the State of Wisconsin, and of the memorial to Congress concerning the Paris Exposition adopted by the legislature of that State during its present session. ANDREW JOHNSON. EXECUTIVE MANSION, February 25, 1867. To the House of Representatives: I transmit herewith a report from the Secretary of the Interior, in reply to the resolution of the House of Representatives of the 11th instant, calling for certain information relative to removals and appointments in his Department since the adjournment of the first session of the Thirty-ninth Congress. ANDREW JOHNSON. WASHINGTON, D. C., February 26, 1867. To the Senate and House of Representatives: I transmit to Congress a copy of a correspondence between the Secretary of State and G. V. Fox, esq., relative to the presentation by the latter to the Emperor of Russia of the resolution of Congress expressive of the feelings of the people of the United States in reference to the providential escape of that sovereign from an attempted assassination. To the Senate of the United States: ANDREW JOHNSON. WASHINGTON, February 26, 1867. I transmit to the Senate, with a view to ratification, a general convention of amity, commerce, and navigation and for the surrender of fugitive criminals between the United States and the Dominican Republic, signed by the plenipotentiaries of the parties at the city of St. Domingo on the 8th of this month. ANDREW JOHNSON. WASHINGTON, D. C., February 27, 1867. To the House of Representatives: I transmit herewith a communication from the Secretary of the Navy, in answer to a resolution of the House of Representatives of the 21st instant, calling for a copy of a letter addressed by Richard M. Boynton and Harriet M. Fisher to the Secretary of the Navy in the month of February, 1863, together with the indorsement made thereon by the Chief of the Bureau of Ordnance. ANDREW JOHNSON. To the House of Representatives: WASHINGTON, March 2, 1867. I transmit herewith a report of the Attorney-General, additional to the one submitted by him December 13, 1866, in reply to the resolution of the House of Representatives of December 10, 1866, requesting "a list of names of all persons who have been engaged in the late rebellion against the United States Government who have been pardoned by the President from April 15, 1865, to this date; that said list shall also state the rank of each person who has been so pardoned, if he has been engaged in the military service of the so-called Confederate States, and the position if he shall have held any civil office under said so-called Confederate government; and shall also further state whether such person has at any time prior to April 14, 1861, held any office under the United States Government, and, if so, what office, together with the reasons for granting such pardons, and also the names of the person or persons at whose solicitation such pardon was granted." ANDREW JOHNSON. To the House of Representatives: MARCH 2, 1867. The act entitled "An act making appropriations for the support of the Army for the year ending June 30, 1868, and for other purposes" contains provisions to which I must call attention. Those provisions are contained in the second section, which in certain cases virtually deprives the President of his constitutional functions as Commander in Chief of the Army, and in the sixth section, which denies to ten States of this Union their constitutional right to protect themselves in any emergency by means of their own militia. Those provisions are out of place in an appropriation act. I am compelled to defeat these necessary appropriations if I withhold my signature to the act. Pressed by these considerations, I feel constrained to return the bill with my signature, but to accompany it with my protest against the sections which I have indicated. ANDREW JOHNSON. VETO MESSAGES. To the Senate of the United States: WASHINGTON, January 5, 1867. I have received and considered a bill entitled "An act to regulate the elective franchise in the District of Columbia," passed by the Senate on the 13th of December and by the House of Representatives on the succeeding day. It was presented for my approval on the 26th ultimo six days after the adjournment of Congress-and is now returned with my objections to the Senate, in which House it originated. Measures having been introduced at the commencement of the first session of the present Congress for the extension of the elective franchise to persons of color in the District of Columbia, steps were taken by the corporate authorities of Washington and Georgetown to ascertain and make known the opinion of the people of the two cities upon a subject so immediately affecting their welfare as a community. The question was submitted to the people at special elections held in the month of December, 1865, when the qualified voters of Washington and Georgetown, with great unanimity of sentiment, expressed themselves opposed to the contemplated legislation. In Washington, in a vote of 6,556-the largest, with but two exceptions, ever polled in that city-only thirty-five ballots were cast for negro suffrage, while in Georgetown, in an aggregate of 813 votes—a number considerably in excess of the average vote at the four preceding annual elections-but one was given in favor of the proposed extension of the elective franchise. As these elections seem to have been conducted with entire fairness, the result must be accepted as a truthful expression of the opinion of the people of the District upon the question which evoked it. Possessing, as an organized community, the same popular right as the inhabitants of a State or Territory to make known their will upon matters which affect their social and political condition, they could have selected no more appropriate mode of memorializing Congress upon the subject of this bill than through the suffrages of their qualified voters. Entirely disregarding the wishes of the people of the District of Columbia, Congress has deemed it right and expedient to pass the measure now submitted for my signature. It therefore becomes the duty of the Executive, standing between the legislation of the one and the will of the other, fairly expressed, to determine whether he should approve the bill, and thus aid in placing upon the statute books of the nation a law against which the people to whom it is to apply have solemnly and with such unanimity protested, or whether he should return it with his objections in the hope that upon reconsideration Congress, acting as the representatives of the inhabitants of the seat of Government, will permit them to regulate a purely local question as to them may seem best suited to their interests and condition. The District of Columbia was ceded to the United States by Maryland and Virginia in order that it might become the permanent seat of Government of the United States. Accepted by Congress, it at once became subject to the "exclusive legislation" for which provision is made in the Federal Constitution. It should be borne in mind, however, that in exercising its functions as the lawmaking power of the District of Columbia the authority of the National Legislature is not without limit, but that Congress is bound to observe the letter and spirit of the Constitution as well in the enactment of local laws for the seat of Government as in legislation common to the entire Union. Were it to be admitted that the right "to exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever" conferred upon Congress unlimited power within the District of Columbia, titles of nobility might be granted within its boundaries; laws might be made "respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press, or the right |