A Compilation of the Messages and Papers of the Presidents. Volume 2, part 1: James Monroe · Chapter 21Special Messages. (3)
This chapter is not translated yet. You are reading the original.
The immediate and direct operation of this act on the military peace establishment of 1815 was that of reduction, from which no officer belonging to it was exempt, unless it might be the topographical engineers; for in retaining the Corps of Engineers, as was manifest as well by the clear import of the section relating to it as by the provisions of every other clause of the act, reference was had to the organization, and not to the officers of the Corps. The establishment of 1815 was reduced from 10,000 to about 6,000 men. The 8 battalions of artillery, constituting what was called the corps of artillery, and the regiment of light artillery as established by the act of 1815, were to be incorporated together and formed into 4 new regiments. The regiments of infantry were to be reduced from 9 to 7, the rifle regiment being broken. Three of the general officers were to be reduced, with very many of the officers belonging to the several corps of the Army, and particularly of the infantry. All the provisions of the act declare of what number of officers and men the several corps provided for by it should thenceforward consist, and not that any corps as then existing or any officer of any corps, unless the topographical engineers were excepted, should be retained. Had it been intended to reduce the officers by corps, or to exempt the officers of any corps from the operation of the law, or in the organization of the several new corps to confine the selection of the officers to be placed in them to the several corps of the like kind then existing, and not extend it to the whole military establishment, including the staff, or to confine the reduction to a proportional number of each corps and of each grade in each corps, the object in either instance might have been easily accomplished by a declaration to that effect. No such declaration was made, nor can such intention be inferred. We see, on the contrary, that every corps of the Army and staff was to be reorganized, and most of them reduced in officers and men, and that in arranging the officers from the old to the new corps full power was granted to the President to take them from any and every corps of the former establishment and place them in the latter. In this latter grant of power it is proper to observe that the most comprehensive terms that could be adopted were used, the authority being to cause the arrangement to be made from the officers of the several corps then in the service of the United States, comprising, of course, every corps of the staff, as well as of artillery and infantry, and not from the corps of troops, as in the former act, and without any limitation as to grades.
It merits particular attention that although the object of this latter act was reduction and such its effect on an extensive scale, 5 new offices were created by it—4 of the grade of colonel for the 4 regiments of artillery and that of Adjutant-General for the Army. Three of the first mentioned were altogether new, the corps having been newly created, and although 1 officer of that grade as applicable to the corps of light artillery had existed, yet as that regiment was reduced and all its parts reorganized in another form and with other duties, being incorporated into the 4 new regiments, the commander was manifestly displaced and incapable of taking the command of either of the new regiments or any station in them until he should be authorized to do so by a new appointment. The same remarks are applicable to the office of Adjutant-General to the Army. It is an office of new creation, differing from that of Adjutant and Inspector General, and likewise from that of adjutant-general to a division, which were severally annulled. It differs from the first in title, rank, and pay, and from the two latter because they had been created by law each for a division, whereas the new office, being instituted without such special designation, could have relation only to the whole Army. It was manifest, therefore, that neither of those officers had any right to this new station nor to any other station unless he should be specially appointed to it, the principle of reduction being applicable to every officer in every corps. It is proper also to observe that the duties of Adjutant-General under the existing arrangement correspond in almost every circumstance with those of the late Adjutant and Inspector General, and not with those of an adjutant-general of a division.
To give effect to this law the President was authorized by the twelfth section to cause the officers, noncommissioned officers, artificers, musicians, and privates of the several corps then in the service of the United States to be arranged in such manner as to form and complete out of the same the force thereby provided for, and to cause the supernumerary officers, noncommissioned officers, artificers, musicians, and privates to be discharged from the service.
In executing this very delicate and important trust I acted with the utmost precaution. Sensible of what I owed to my country, I felt strongly the obligation of observing the utmost impartiality in selecting those officers who were to be retained. In executing this law I had no personal object to accomplish or feeling to gratify—no one to retain, no one to remove. Having on great consideration fixed the principles on which the reduction should be made, I availed myself of the example of my predecessor by appointing through the proper department a board of general officers to make the selection, and whose report I adopted.
In transferring the officers from the old to the new corps the utmost care was taken to place them in the latter in the grades and corps to which they had respectively belonged in the former, so far as it might be practicable. This, though not enjoined by the law, appearing to be just and proper, was never departed from except in peculiar cases and under imperious circumstances.
In filling the original vacancies in the artillery and in the newly created office of Adjutant-General I considered myself at liberty to place in them any officer belonging to any part of the whole military establishment, whether of the staff or line. In filling original vacancies—that is, offices newly created—it is my opinion, as a general principle, that Congress have no right under the Constitution to impose any restraint by law on the power granted to the President so as to prevent his making a free selection of proper persons for these offices from the whole body of his fellow-citizens. Without, however, entering here into that question, I have no hesitation in declaring it as my opinion that the law fully authorized a selection from any branch of the whole military establishment of 1815. Justified, therefore, as I thought myself in taking that range by the very highest sanction, the sole object to which I had to direct my attention was the merit of the officers to be selected for these stations. Three generals of great merit were either to be dismissed or otherwise provided for. The very gallant and patriotic defender of New Orleans had intimated his intention to retire, but at my suggestion expressed his willingness to accept the office of commissioner to receive the cession of the Floridas and of governor for a short time of that Territory. As to one, therefore, there was no difficulty. For the other two provision could only be made in the mode which was adopted. General Macomb, who had signalized himself in the defense of Plattsburg, was placed at the head of the Corps of Engineers, to which he had originally belonged, and in which he had acquired great experience, Colonel Armistead, then at the head of that corps, having voluntarily accepted one of the new regiments of artillery, for which he possessed very suitable qualifications. General Atkinson, likewise an officer of great merit, was appointed to the newly created office of Adjutant-General. Brevet General Porter, an officer of great experience in the artillery, and merit, was appointed to the command of another of those regiments. Colonel Fenwick, then the oldest lieutenant-colonel of artillery, and who had suffered much in the late war by severe wounds, was appointed to a third, and Colonel Towson, who had served with great distinction in the same corps and been twice brevetted for his gallantry in the late war, was appointed to the last remaining one. General Atkinson having declined the office of Adjutant General, Colonel Gadsden, an officer of distinguished merit and believed to possess qualifications suitably adapted to it, was appointed in his stead. In making the arrangement the merits of Colonel Butler and Colonel Jones were not overlooked. The former was assigned to the place which he would have held in the line if he had retained his original lineal commission, and the latter to his commission in the line, which he had continued to hold with his staff appointment.
That the reduction of the Army and the arrangement of the officers from the old to the new establishment and the appointments referred to were in every instance strictly conformable to law will, I think, be apparent. To the arrangement generally no objection has been heard; it has been made, however, to the appointments to the original vacancies, and particularly to those of Colonel Towson and Colonel Gadsden. To those appointments, therefore, further attention is due. If they were improper it must be either that they were illegal or that the officers did not merit the offices conferred on them. The acknowledged merit of the officers and the peculiar fitness for the offices to which they were respectively appointed must preclude all objection on that head. Having already suggested my impression that in filling offices newly created, to which on no principle whatever anyone could have a claim of right, Congress could not under the Constitution restrain the free selection of the President from the whole body of his fellow-citizens, I shall only further remark that if that impression is well founded all objection to these appointments must cease. If the law imposed such restraint, it would in that case be void. But, according to my judgment, the law imposed none. An objection to the legality of those appointments must be founded either on the principle that those officers were not comprised within the corps then in the service of the United States—that is, did not belong to the peace establishment—or that the power granted by the word "arrange" imposed on the President the necessity of placing in these new offices persons of the same grade only from the old. It is believed that neither objection is well founded. Colonel Towson belonged to one of the corps then in the service of the United States, or, in other words, of the military peace establishment. By the act of 1815-16 the Pay Department, of which the Paymaster General was the chief, was made one of the branches of the staff, and he and all those under him were subjected to the Rules and Articles of War. The appointment, therefore, of him, and especially to a new office, was strictly conformable to law.
The only difference between the fifth section of the act of 1815 for reducing the Army and the twelfth section of the act of 1821 for still further reducing it, by which the power to carry those laws into effect was granted to the President in each instance, consists in this, that by the former he was to cause the arrangement to be made of the officers, noncommissioned officers, musicians, and privates of the several corps of troops then in the service of the United States, whereas in the latter the term troops was omitted. It can not be doubted that that omission had an object, and that it was thereby intended to guard against misconstruction in so very material and important a circumstance by authorizing the application of the act unequivocally to every corps of the staff as well as of the line. With that word a much wider range was given to the act of 1815 on the reduction which then took place than under the last act. The omission of it from the last act, together with all the sanctions which were given by Congress to the construction of the law in the reduction made under the former, could not fail to dispel all doubt as to the extent of the power granted by the last law and of the principles which ought to guide, and on which it was thereby made the duty of the President to execute it. With respect to the other objection—that is, that officers of the same grade only ought to have been transferred to these new offices—it is equally unfounded. It is admitted that officers may be taken from the old corps and reduced and arranged in the new in inferior grades, as was done under the former reduction. This admission puts an end to the objection in this case; for if an officer may be reduced and arranged from one corps to another by an entire change of grade, requiring a new commission and a new nomination to the Senate, I see no reason why an officer may not be advanced in like manner. In both instances the grade in the old corps is alike disregarded. The transfer from it to the new turns on the merit of the party, and it is believed that the claim in this instance is felt by all with peculiar sensibility. The claim of Colonel Towson is the stronger because the arrangement of him to the office to which he is now nominated is not to one from which any officer has been removed, and to which any other officer may in any view of the case be supposed to have had a claim. As Colonel Gadsden held the office of Inspector-General, and as such was acknowledged by all to belong to the staff of the Army, it is not perceived on what ground his appointment can be objected to.
If such a construction is to be given to the act of 1821 as to confine the transfer of officers from the old to the new establishment to the corps of troops—that is, to the line of the Army—the whole staff of the Army in every branch would not only be excluded from any appointment in the new establishment, but altogether disbanded from the service. It would follow also that all the offices of the staff under the new arrangement must be filled by officers belonging to the new establishment after its organization and their arrangement in it. Other consequences not less serious would follow. If the right of the President to fill these original vacancies by the selection of officers from any branch of the whole military establishment was denied, he would be compelled to place in them officers of the same grade whose corps had been reduced, and they with them. The effect, therefore, of the law as to those appointments would be to legislate into office men who had been already legislated out of office, taking from the President all agency in their appointment. Such a construction would not only be subversive of the obvious principles of the Constitution, but utterly inconsistent with the spirit of the law itself, since it would provide offices for a particular grade, and fix every member of that grade in those offices, at a time when every other grade was reduced, and among them generals and other officers of the highest merit. It would also defeat every object of selection, since colonels of infantry would be placed at the head of regiments of artillery, a service in which they might have had no experience, and for which they might in consequence be unqualified.
Having omitted in the message to Congress at the commencement of the session to state the principles on which this law had been executed, and having imperfectly explained them in the message to the Senate of the 17th of January last, I deem it particularly incumbent on me, as well from a motive of respect to the Senate as to place my conduct in the duty imposed on me by that act in a clear point of view, to make this communication at this time. The examples under the law of 1815, whereby officers were reduced and arranged from the old corps to the new in inferior grades, fully justify all that has been done under the law of 1821. If the power to arrange under the former law authorized the removal of one officer from a particular station and the location of another in it, reducing the latter from a higher to an inferior grade, with the advice and consent of the Senate, it surely justifies under the latter law the arrangement of these officers, with a like sanction, to offices of new creation, from which no one had been removed and to which no one had a just claim. It is on the authority of these examples, supported by the construction which I gave to the law, that I have acted in the discharge of this high trust. I am aware that many officers of great merit, having the strongest claims on their country, have been reduced and others dismissed, but under the law that result was inevitable. It is believed that none have been retained who had not, likewise, the strongest claims to the appointments which have been conferred on them. To discriminate between men of acknowledged merit, especially in a way to affect so sensibly and materially their feelings and interests, for many of whom I have personal consideration and regard, has been a most painful duty; yet I am conscious that I have discharged it with the utmost impartiality. Had I opened the door to change in any case, even where error might have been committed, against whom could I afterwards have closed it, and into what consequences might not such a proceeding have led? The same remarks are applicable to the subject in its relation to the Senate, to whose calm and enlightened judgment, with these explanations, I again submit the nominations which have been rejected.
JAMES MONROE.
APRIL 15, 1822.
To the Senate of the United States:
In compliance with the resolution of the Senate of the 12th instant, requesting the President of the United States "to cause to be laid before the Senate the original proceedings of the board of general officers charged with the reduction of the Army under the act of the 2d of March, 1821, together with all communications to and from said board on the subject of reducing the Army, including the case submitted to the Attorney-General, and his opinion thereon," I now transmit a report from the Secretary of War, furnishing the information requested.
JAMES MONROE.
WASHINGTON, April 15, 1822.
To the Senate of the United States:
In compliance with a resolution of the Senate requesting the President of the United States to lay before that House any report or information which may be in his possession as to the most eligible situation on the Western waters for the erection of a national arsenal, I herewith transmit a report from the Secretary of War, containing all the information on that subject in the possession of the Executive.
JAMES MONROE.
WASHINGTON, April 15, 1822.
To the House of Representatives of the United States:
In compliance with a resolution of the House of Representatives of the 16th of February last, requesting the President of the United States "to communicate to that House whether any foreign government has made any claim to any part of the territory of the United States upon the coast of the Pacific Ocean north of the forty-second degree of latitude, and to what extent; whether any regulations have been made by foreign powers affecting the trade on that coast, and how it affects the interest of this Republic, and whether any communications have been made to this Government by foreign powers touching the contemplated occupation of Columbia River," I now transmit a report from the Secretary of State, containing the information embraced by that resolution.
JAMES MONROE.
WASHINGTON, April 18, 1822.
To the House of Representatives:
I communicate to the House of Representatives copies of sundry papers having relation to the transactions in East and West Florida, which have been received at the Department of State since my message to the two Houses of Congress of the 28th of January last, together with copies of two letters from the Secretary of State upon the same subject.
JAMES MONROE.
[The same message was sent to the Senate.]
WASHINGTON, April 23, 1822.
To the House of Representatives:
In compliance with a resolution of the House of Representatives of the 29th January last, requesting the President of the United States to cause to be communicated to that House certain information relative to the claim made by Jonathan Carver to certain lands within the United States near the Falls of St. Anthony. I now transmit a report of the Secretary of the Treasury, which, with the accompanying documents, contains all the information on this subject in the possession of the Executive.
JAMES MONROE.
WASHINGTON, April 26, 1822.
To the Senate of the United States:
I transmit to the Senate, agreeably to their resolution of yesterday, a report from the Secretary of State, with copies of the papers requested by that resolution, in relation to the recognition of the South American Provinces.
JAMES MONROE.
WASHINGTON, April 29, 1822.
To the House of Representatives:
I transmit to the House of Representatives a report from the Secretary of State, in pursuance of their resolution of the 20th instant, 1 "requesting to be furnished with a copy of the judicial proceedings in the United States court for the district of Louisiana in the case of the French slave ship La Pensee."
JAMES MONROE.
WASHINGTON, April 30, 1822.
To the Senate of the United States:
In compliance with a resolution of the Senate, requesting the President of the United States to cause to be laid before the Senate certain information respecting the practical operation of the system of subsisting the Army under the provisions of the act passed the 14th of April, 1818, etc., I herewith transmit a report from the Secretary of War, furnishing the information required.
JAMES MONROE.
WASHINGTON, May 1, 1822.
To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States:
In the message to both Houses of Congress at the commencement of their present session it was mentioned that the Government of Norway had issued an ordinance for admitting the vessels of the United States and their cargoes into the ports of that Kingdom upon the payment of no other or higher duties than are paid by Norwegian vessels, of whatever articles the said cargoes may consist and from whatever ports the vessels laden with them may come.
In communicating this ordinance to the Government of the United States that of Norway has requested the benefit of a similar and reciprocal provision for the vessels of Norway and their cargoes which may enter the ports of the United States.
This provision being within the competency only of the legislative authority of Congress, I communicate to them herewith copies of the communications received from the Norwegian Government in relation to the subject, and recommend the same to their consideration.
JAMES MONROE.
WASHINGTON, May 1, 1822.
To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States:
I transmit herewith to Congress copies of letters received at the Department of State from the minister of Great Britain on the subject of the duties discriminating between imported rolled and hammered iron. I recommend them particularly to the consideration of Congress, believing that although there may be ground for controversy with regard to the application of the engagements of the treaty to the case, yet a liberal construction of those engagements would be compatible at once with a conciliatory and a judicious policy.
JAMES MONROE.
WASHINGTON, May 4, 1822.
To the House of Representatives of the United States:
In compliance with a resolution of the House of Representatives of the 19th of April, requesting the President "to cause to be communicated to the House, if not injurious to the public interest, any letter which may have been received from Jonathan Russell, one of the ministers who concluded the treaty of Ghent, in conformity with the indications contained in his letter of the 25th of December, 1814," I have to state that having referred the resolution to the Secretary of State, and it appearing, by a report from him, that no such document had been deposited among the archives of the Department, I examined and found among my private papers a letter of that description marked "private" by himself. I transmit a copy of the report of the Secretary of State, by which it appears that Mr. Russell, on being apprised that the document referred to by the resolution had not been deposited in the Department of State, delivered there "a paper purporting to be the duplicate of a letter written by him from Paris on the 11th of February, 1815, to the then Secretary of State, to be communicated to the House as the letter called for by the resolution."
On the perusal of the document called for I find that it communicates a difference of opinion between Mr. Russell and a majority of his colleagues in certain transactions which occurred in the negotiations at Ghent, touching interests which have been since satisfactorily adjusted by treaty between the United States and Great Britain. The view which Mr. Russell presents of his own conduct and that of his colleagues in those transactions will, it is presumed, call from the two surviving members of that mission who differed from him a reply containing their view of those transactions and of the conduct of the parties in them, and who, should his letter be communicated to the House of Representatives, will also claim that their reply should be communicated in like manner by the Executive—a claim which, on the principle of equal justice, could not be resisted. The Secretary of State, one of the ministers referred to, has already expressed a desire that Mr. Russell's letter should be communicated, and that I would transmit at the same time a communication from him respecting it.
On full consideration of the subject I have thought it would be improper for the Executive to communicate the letter called for unless the House, on a knowledge of these circumstances, should desire it, in which case the document called for shall be communicated, accompanied by a report from the Secretary of State, as above suggested. I have directed a copy to be delivered to Mr. Russell, to be disposed of as he may think proper, and have caused the original to be deposited in the Department of State, with instruction to deliver a copy to any person who may be interested.
JAMES MONROE.
WASHINGTON, May 6, 1822.
To the Senate and House of Representatives:
I transmit to Congress translations of two letters from Don Joaquin d'Anduaga to the Secretary of State, which have been received at the Department of State since my last message communicating copies of big correspondence with this Government.
JAMES MONROE.
Don Joaquin de Anduaga to the Secretary of State.
[Translation.]
PHILADELPHIA, April 24, 1822.
SIR: As soon as the news was received in Madrid of the recent occurrences in New Spain after the arrival at Vera Cruz of the Captain-General and supreme political chief appointed for those Provinces, Don Juan O. Donojú, and some papers were seen relative to those same transactions, it was feared that for forming the treaty concluded in Cordova on the 24th of August last between the said General and the traitor, Colonel Dr. Augustine Iturbide, it had been falsely supposed that the former had power from His Catholic Majesty for that act, and in a little time the correctness of those suspicions was found, as, among other things, the said O. Donojú, when on the 26th of the same August he sent this treaty to the governor of Vera Cruz, notifying him of its prompt and punctual observance, he told him that at his sailing from the Peninsula preparation for the independence of Mexico was already thought of, and that its bases were approved of by the Government and by a commission of the Cortes. His Majesty, on sight of this and of the fatal impression which so great an imposture had produced in some ultramarine Provinces, and what must without difficulty be the consequence among the rest, thought proper to order that, by means of a circular to all the chiefs and corporations beyond seas, this atrocious falsehood should be disbelieved; and now he has deigned to command me to make it known to the Government of the United States that it is false as far as General O. Donojú published beyond his instructions, by pointing out to it that he never could have been furnished with other instructions than those conformable to constitutional principles.
In compliance with this order of His Majesty, I can do no less than observe to you, sir, how unfounded one of the reasons is in your note of the 6th instant for the recognition by this Government of those of the insurgent Provinces of Spanish-America—that it was founded on the treaty made by O. Donojú with Iturbide—since not having had that power nor instruction to conclude it it is clearly null and of no value.