gallantry at Fort Henry, Fort Donelson, Island No. 10, and at various other places, whilst in command of the naval forces, embracing a period of nearly ten months. ABRAHAM LINCOLN. To the Senate of the United States: WASHINGTON, D. C., July 5, 1862. I transmit herewith, for the constitutional action of the Senate thereon, a treaty negotiated in this city on the 3d instant with the Sac and Fox Indians of the Mississippi. Letters from the Secretary of the Interior and Commissioner of Indian Affairs accompany the treaty. ABRAHAM LINCOLN. WASHINGTON, July 9, 1862. To the Senate of the United States: I transmit to the Senate, for consideration with a view to ratification, a postal convention with Costa Rica, concluded at San Jose on the 9th June last. ABRAHAM LINCOLN. To the Senate of the United States: WASHINGTON, D. C., July 11, 1862. I transmit to the Senate, for its constitutional action thereon, a treaty negotiated at the Kickapoo Agency on the 28th of June, 1862, between Charles B. Keith, commissioner on the part of the United States, and the chiefs, headmen, and delegates of the Kickapoo Indians of Kansas. A letter of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs of the roth instant is also transmitted, suggesting amendments to the treaty for the consideration of the Senate. ABRAHAM LINCOLN. WASHINGTON, D. C., July 11, 1862. To the Senate and House of Representatives: I recommend that the thanks of Congress be given to the following officers of the United States Navy: Captain James L. Lardner, for meritorious conduct at the battle of Port Royal and distinguished services on the coast of the United States against the enemy. Captain Charles Henry Davis, for distinguished services in conflict with the enemy at Fort Pillow, at Memphis, and for successful operations at other points in the waters of the Mississippi River, Commander John A. Dahlgren, for distinguished services in the line of his profession, improvements in ordnance, and zealous and efficient labors in the ordnance branch of the service. Commander Stephen C. Rowan, for distinguished services in the waters of North Carolina, and particularly in the capture of Newbern, being in chief command of the naval forces. Commander David D. Porter, for distinguished services in the conception and preparation of the means used for the capture of the forts below New Orleans, and for highly meritorious conduct in the management of the mortar flotilla during the bombardment of Forts Jackson and St. Philip. Captain Silas H. Stringham, now on the retired list, for distinguished services in the capture of Forts Hatteras and Clark. ABRAHAM LINCOLN. To the House of Representatives: WASHINGTON, July 12, 1862. I transmit a report of the Secretary of State upon the subject of the resolution of the House of Representatives of the 9th ultimo, requesting information in regard to the relations between the United States and foreign powers. ABRAHAM LINCOLN. WASHINGTON, D. C., July 14, 1862. Fellow-Citizens of the Senate and House of Representatives: Herewith is a draft of a bill to compensate any State which may abolish slavery within its limits, the passage of which substantially as presented I respectfully and earnestly recommend. ABRAHAM LINCOLN. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That whenever the President of the United States shall be satisfied that any State shall have lawfully abolished slavery within and throughout such State, either immediately or gradually, it shall be the duty of the President, assisted by the Secretary of the Treasury, to prepare and deliver to such State an amount of 6 per cent interest-bearing bonds of the United States equal to the aggregate value at $- per head of all the slaves within such State as reported by the census of the year 1860; the whole amount for any one State to be delivered at once if the abolishment be immediate, or in equal annual installments if it be gradual, interest to begin running on each bond at the time of its delivery, and not before. And be it further enacted, That if any State, having so received any such bonds, shall at any time afterwards by law reintroduce or tolerate slavery within its limits contrary to the act of abolishment upon which such bonds shall have been received, said bonds so received by said State shall at once be null and void, in whosesoever hands they may be, and such State shall refund to the United States all interest which may have been paid on such bonds. EXECUTIVE MANSION, Washington, July 15, 1862. Hon. SOLOMON FOOT, President pro tempore of the Senate. SIR: Please inform the Senate that I shall be obliged if they will postpone the adjournment at least one day beyond the time which I understand to be now fixed for it. Your obedient servant, ABRAHAM LINCOLN. [The same message was addressed to Hon. Galusha A. Grow, Speaker of the House of Representatives.] JULY 17, 1862. Fellow-Citizens of the Senate and House of Representatives: Considering the bill for "An act to suppress insurrection, to punish treason and rebellion, to seize and confiscate the property of rebels, and for other purposes," and the joint resolution explanatory of said act as . being substantially one, I have approved and signed both. Before I was informed of the passage of the resolution I had prepared the draft of a message stating objections to the bill becoming a law, a copy of which draft is herewith transmitted. Fellow-Citizens of the House of Representatives: ABRAHAM LINCOLN. I herewith return to your honorable body, in which it originated, the bill for an act entitled "An act to suppress treason and rebellion, to seize and confiscate the property of rebels, and for other purposes," together with my objections to its becoming a law. There is much in the bill to which I perceive no objection. It is wholly prospective, and touches neither person nor property of any loyal citizen, in which particulars it is just and proper. The first and second sections provide for the conviction and punishment of persons who shall be guilty of treason and persons who shall "incite, set on foot, assist, or engage in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or shall give aid and comfort thereto, or shall engage in or give aid and comfort to any such existing rebellion or insurrection." By fair construction persons within these sections are not to be punished without regular trials in duly constituted courts, under the forms and all the substantial provisions of law and of the Constitution applicable to their several cases. To this I perceive no objection, especially as such persons would be within the general pardoning power and also the special provision for pardon and amnesty contained in this act. It is also provided that the slaves of persons convicted under these sections shall be free. I think there is an unfortunate form of expression rather than a substantial objection in this. It is startling to say that Congress can free a slave within a State, and yet if it were said the ownership of the slave had first been transferred to the nation and that Congress had then liberated him the difficulty would at once vanish. And this is the real case. The traitor against the General Government forfeits his slave at least as justly as he does any other property, and he forfeits both to the Government against which he offends. The Government, so far as there can be ownership, thus owns the forfeited slaves, and the question for Congress in regard to them is, "Shall they be made free or be sold to new masters?" I perceive no objection to Congress deciding in advance that they shall be free. To the high honor of Kentucky, as I am So far as wish to notice the fifth and sixth sections, they may be considered together. That the enforcement of these sections would do no injustice to the persons embraced within them is clear. That those who make a causeless war should be compelled to pay the cost of it is too obviously just to be called in question. To give governmental protection to the property of persons who have abandoned it and gone on a crusade to overthrow that same government is absurd if considered in the mere light of justice. The severest justice may not always be the best policy. The principle of seizing and appropriating the property of the persons embraced within these sections is certainly not very objectionable, but a justly discriminating application of it would be very difficult, and to a great extent impossible. And would it not be wise to place a power of remission somewhere, so that these persons may know they have something to lose by persisting and something to save by desisting? I am not sure whether such power of remission is or is not within section 13. Without any special act of Congress, I think our military commanders, when, in military phrase, "they are within the enemy's country," should in an orderly manner seize and use whatever of real or personal property may be necessary or convenient for their commands, at the same time preserving in some way the evidence of what they do. What I have said in regard to slaves while commenting on the first and second sections is applicable to the ninth, with the difference that no provision is made in the whole act for determining whether a particular individual slave does or does not fall within the classes defined in that section. He is to be free upon certain conditions, but whether those conditions do or do not pertain to him no mode of ascertaining is provided. This could be easily supplied. To the tenth section I make no objection. The oath therein required seems to be proper, and the remainder of the section is substantially identical with a law already existing. 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. VETO MESSAGES. To the Senate of the United States: JUNE 23, 1862. The bill which has passed the House of Representatives and the Senate entitled "An act to repeal that part of an act of Congress which prohibits the circulation of bank notes of a less denomination than $5 in the District of Columbia" has received my attentive consideration, and I now return it to the Senate, in which it originated, with the following objections: 1. The bill proposes to repeal the existing legislation prohibiting the circulation of bank notes of a less denomination than $5 within the District of Columbia without permitting the issuing of such bills by banks not now legally authorized to issue them. In my judgment it will be found impracticable in the present condition of the currency to make such a discrimination. The banks have generally suspended specie payments, and a legal sanction given to the circulation of the irredeemable notes of one class of them will almost certainly be so extended in practical operation as to include those of all classes, whether authorized or unauthorized. If this view be correct, the currency of the District, |