MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT TO BU1TsiT HOUSES iiGG 4N C0NGpEss
{"character_count": 5429, "word_count": 934, "ccnet_language_score": [0.958899974822998], "ccnet_perplexity": [2033.199951171875], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
on Foreign Relations, n both Houses.

 MONDAY, JAM Ia. To the ssnatS~and House ef Representation

 GENTLEMEN-in my message at the anan. ing of your session, ] informed you that ons Charge q Affaires at Paris had been instrne ted to ask for tic final determination of tba French Government, in relation to the nav ment of the inaemnidcation secured by t5a treaty of the 4th of July, 1881, and tba, when advice of the result should be received it would be made the subject of special communication.

 In execution of this design, now trans. nit to you the papers numbered from to l3, inclusive, confirming, among other things, the correspondence on this suhiect between our Charge d'Affaires and tbs French Minister of Foreign Affairs, from which 1t will be seen that France requires. as c condition precedent to the execution of a treaty internationally ratified, and to the payment of debt acknowledged by all the branches of her government to be due. taa. certain explanations shall be made, of which she dictates tlle terms. These terms are such as that government has already been officially informed cannot be complied with and, if persisted in, they must be considered as deliberate refusal On the part of France to fnlil engagements binding by the laws of nations, and held sacred by the whole ciyili- zed world. The nature of the act which France requires of this government is clear ly set forth in the letter of the French Minis ter, marked No l. We will pay the money. says he, when < the gopeyameat ef the Unted States IS ready on itS part 70 deelare b asoH ciaiiQ iA aei.itne., that t regretS the aisandfr. staudlHg ,ohich has arisen tetqoeea t1e tsso cJuatries; that Hsis misunderstanding is Jouh- ded OH c mistake; Mat aeucr e'aered iuto its iAte4ti0a 5o caH t7l question ute good flith of the French gouei31ae}tt, or 10 take atenacisg etituds toqeaq,ds Fs.auee:n and he adds, "i # the gooernmeH of the URifeI Statcs does aot gire this asSuraRce, aoe saaH be obliged b Hiah ftat ti,is misunderstanding. Is notthe re- saa of etYo1. ?

 In the letter marked No. 6, the French Minster also remarks that ( thf gouerameM ofibe United States kHoaeS that upon itselfde- 1 peads henceforarard Ale e1eeutioa of ihe tfeasy 1 ef Jaiy 1, lS3l."

 Obliged by the precise language thus used by the French Minister, to view t as 2 per- ematory refusal to execute the treaty. except on terms incompatible with the honor and Eindepandence oftae United States, and per. | 9udGEu =kUdL3 Otl C0nHl0SlIiIZ LiiC CDIIcbpOl- denee now submitted to you, you can regard 1t in no other light, 1t becomes my duty to call ] your attention to such measures as tue exi- gency of the case demands, if the elamof Interfering in the communications between the different branches of our government shall be persisted in. This pretention s ren- dered the more unreasonable by the fact that the substance of the required explanation has been repeatedly and voluntarily given bsfare 1t was insisted on as condition--a condition the mare humiliating because it IS demanded as the equivalent of | peeuniary considera- tien. Does France desire onlya declaration that we had F 0 intention to obtain our rights by an address to her fears rather than to her justice! She has already had 1t, frankly and explicitly given by our Minister accredited to her Government, his act ratified by me, and my confirmation oft officially communi- cated by him, in his letter to the French Minister of Foreign Affairs of the 25th of ] April, 1855, and repeated by my published approval of that letter after the passage of the bill of indemnific Does France want degrading, servle repetition of this act ln terms which she shall dictate, and which will involve an assumed right to n- terfere in our domestic councils She will never obtain it. 1he-spirit fthe American people, the dignity of the legislature, and the firm resolve of their executive govern rnent, forbid it.

 As the answer Of the French Minister b our Charge d'Affaires at Paris contains an allusion to a letter addressed by him to the l Representative of France at this place,lt now becomes proper to lay before you the correspondence had between that functonay and the Secretary of State relative to that letter, and to accompany the same with such explanations as will enable you to under stand tine course of the Executive in regard l to 1t. Recurring to the historical statement

 made at the commencement of your session, of the origin and progress of our difficulties with France, 1t will be recollected that, on l the return of our Minister to the United States, caused my official approval of the explanations he had given to the French Minister of Foreign Affairs to be made pub lie As the French government had noticed the message without its being officially communicated, it was not doubted that, lis they were disposed to pay the money dueto us, they would notice any public explanation of the government of the United States m the same way. But, contrary to these we'll founded expectations, the French MlnlsT did not take this fair opportunity to reliese themselves from their unfortunate posltloas and to do justice to the United States.

 Whle, however, the government oi 'h' United States was awaiting the movements ot the French government, in perfect co,n' dence that the difficulty was at an end, tns Secretary of State received a call from lhe' French Charge d 4 Affars in Westinghouse