To the Senate of the United States: I transmit, for the consideration of the Senate with a view to ratification, a treaty of friendship, commerce and navigation between the United States and the Republic of Honduras, signed by the plenipotentiaries of the parties in this city on the 28th day of last month. The 14th article of this treaty is an exact copy of the supplemental article of the treaty of the "treaty of friendship, commerce and navigation between Great Britain and the Republic of Honduras," dated 26th day of August, 1856, with the necessary changes in names and dates. Under this article the Government and people of the United States will enjoy, in the fullest and most satisfactory manner, the use of the "Honduras Interoceanic Railway," in consideration of which the United States recognizes the rights of sovereignty and property of Honduras over the line of the road and guarantees its neutrality; and when "the road shall have been completed equally engages in conjunction with Honduras to protect the same from interruption, seizure or unjust confiscation from whatever quarter the attempt may proceed." This treaty is in accordance with the policy inaugurated by the Government of the United States and in an especial manner by the Senate in the year 1846, and several treaties have been concluded to carry it into effect. It is simple, and may be embraced in a few words. On the one side a grant of free and uninterrupted transit for the Government and people of the United States over the transit routes across the Isthmus, and on the other, a guarantee of the neutrality and protection of these routes, not only for the benefit of the Republics through which they pass, but in the language of our treaty with New Granada, in order to secure to themselves the tranquil and constant enjoyment of these interoceanic communications. The first in the series of these treaties is that with New Granada, of the 12 December, 1846. This treaty was concluded before our acquisition of California, and when our interests on the Pacific Coasts were of far less magnitude than at the present day. For years before this period, however, the routes across the Isthmus had attracted the serious attention of this Government. This treaty, after granting us the right of transit across the Isthmus of Panama in the most ample terms, binds this Government to guarantee to New Granada "the perfect neutrality of the before-mentioned Isthmus, with the view that the free transit from the one to the other sea may not be interrupted or embarrassed in any future time while this treaty exists" In one respect it goes further than any of its successors, because it not only guarantees the neutrality of the route itself, but "the rights of sovereignty and property" of New Granada over the entire province of Panama. It is worthy of remark that when it was sent to the Senate it was accompanied by a message of President Polk dated February 10, 1847, in which the attention of that body was especially called to these important stipulations of the 35th article, and in which it was stated, moreover, that our chargé d'affaires, who negotiated the treaty, "acted in this particular upon his own responsibility and without instructions." Under these circumstances the treaty was approved by the Senate, and the transit policy to which I have referred was deliberately adopted. A copy of the Executive document (confidential), 29th Congress, 2d session, containing this message of President Polk, and the papers which accompanied it, is hereto annexed. The next in order of time of these treaties of transit and guarantee is that of the 19 April, 1850, with Great Britain, commonly called the Clayton and Bulwer treaty. This treaty, in affirmance of the policy of the New Granada treaty, established a general principle which has ever since, I believe, guided the proceedings of both Goveruments. The 8th article of that treaty contains the following stipulations: "The Government of the United States having not only desired in entering into this convention to accomplish a particular object, but also to establish a general principle, they hereby agree to extend their protection, by treaty stipulations, to any other practicable communications, whether by canal or railway, across the Isthmus which connects North and South America, and especially to the interoceanic communications, should the same prove to be practicable, whether by canal or railway, which are now proposed to be established by the way of Tehuantepec or Panama." And that the said "canals or railways shall also be open on like terms to the citizens and subjects of every other State which is willing to grant thereto such protection as the United States and Great Britain propose to afford." The United States, in a short time after the Clayton and Bulwer treaty was concluded, carried this stipulation in regard to the Tehuantepec route into effect by their treaty with Mexico of the 30th December, 1853. The eighth article of this treaty, after granting to us the transit privileges therein mentioned, stipulates that "the Mexican Government having agreed to protect with its whole power the prosecution, preservation, and security of the work, the United States may extend its protection, as it shall judge wise, to use it when it may feel sanctioned and warranted by the public or international law." This is a sweeping grant of power to the United States, which no nation ought to have conceded, but which, it is believed, has been confined within safe limits by our treaty with Mexico now before the Senate. Such was believed to be the established policy of the Government at the commencement of this administration, viz, the grant of transits in our favor, and the guarantee of our protection as an equivalent. This guarantee can never be dangerous under our form of Government, because it can never be carried into execution without the express authority of Congress. Still, standing on the face of treaties, as it does, it deters all evil-disposed parties from interfering with these routes. Under such circumstances the attention of the Executive was early turned to the Nicaragua route as in many respects the most important and valuable to the citizens of our country. In concluding a treaty to secure our rights of transit over this route I experienced many difficulties which I need not now enumerate, because they are detailed in different messages to Congress. Finally a treaty was negotiated exactly in accordance with the established policy of the Government and the views of the Executive, and clear from the embarrassments which might arise under the phraseology of previous treaties. The 14th article of the treaty contains a full, clear, and specific grant of the right of transit to the United States and their citizens, and is believed to be perfectly unexceptionable. The 15th article, instead of leaving one equiv alent duty of protection, general and unlimited, as in our treaty with New Granada, and in the Clayton and Bulwer treaty, or instead of that general right assured to the Government in the Mexican treaty of extending its protection as it shall itself judge wise, when it may feel sanctioned and warranted by the public or international law, confines the interference conceded within just and specific limits. Under the 16th article of this treaty the Government of the United States has no right to interpose for the protection of the Nicaragua route, except with the cousent or at the request of the Government of Nicaragua or of the minister thereof at Washington, or of the competent, legally appointed local authorities, civil or military, and when in the opinion of the Government of Nicaragua the necessity ceases such force shall be immediately withdrawn. Nothing can be more carefully guarded than this provision. No force can be employed unless upon the request of the Government of Nicaragua, and it must be immediately withdrawn whenever in the opinion of that Government the necessity ceases. When Congress shall come to adopt the measures necessary to carry this provision of the treaty into effect they can guard it from any abuses which may possibly arise. The general policy contained in these articles, although inaugurated by the United States, has been fully adopted by the Governments of Great Britain and France. The plenipotentiaries of both these Governments have recently negotiated treaties with Nicaragua, which are but transcripts of the treaty between the United States and Nicaragua now before the Senate. The treaty with France has been ratified, it is understood, by both the French and Nicaraguan Governments, and is now in operation. That with Great Britain has been delayed by other negotiations in Nicaragua, but it is believed that these are now concluded and that the ratifications of the British treaty will soon, therefore, be exchanged. It is presumed that no objection will be made to "the exceptional case" of the 16th article, which is only intended to provide for the landing of sailors or marines from our vessels which may happen to be within reach of the point of difficulty, in order to protect the lives and property of citizens of the United States from unforeseen and imminent danger. The same considerations may be suggested with respect to the 5th article of the treaty with Mexico, which is also pending before the Senate. This article is an exact copy of the 16th article, just referred to, of the treaty with Nicaragua. The treaty with Honduras, which is now submitted to the Senate, follows on this subject the language of the British treaty with that Republic, and is not, therefore, identical in its terms with the Nicaraguan and Mexican treaties. The same policy, however, has been adopted in all of them, and it will not fail, I am persuaded, to receive from the Senate all that consideration which it so eminently deserves. The importance to the United States of securing free and safe transit routes across the American Isthmus cannot well be overestimated. These routes are of great interest, of course, to all commercial nations; but they are especially so to us, from our geographical and political position as an American state, and because they furnish a necessary communication between our Atlantic and Pacific States and Territories. The Government of the United States can never permit these routes to be permanently interrupted; nor can it safely allow them to pass under the control of other rival nations. While it seeks no exclusive privileges upon them for itself, it can never consent to be made tributary to their use to any European power. It is worthy of consideratiou, however, whether, to some extent, it would not necessarily become so, if after Great Britian and France have adopted our policy, and made treaties with the Isthmian Governments, in pursuance of it, we should ourselves reconsider it and refuse to pursue it in the treaties of the United States. I might add, that the opening of these transit routes cannot fail to extend the trade and commerce of the United States with the countries through which they pass; to afford an outlet and a market for our manufactures within their territories; to encourage American citizens to develop their vast stores of mining and mineral wealth for our benefit; and to introduce among them a wholesome American influence calculated to prevent revolutions and to render their Governments stable. JAMES BUCHANAN. WASHINGTON, April 5, 1860. The messages were read. Ordered, That the nomination of James G. Clarke be referred to the Committee of Foreign Relations. Ordered, That the nomination of A. Morsell be referred to the Committee on Commerce. Ordered, That the nominations of Joseph P. Baldwin and Thomas Walke be referred to the Committee on Public Lands. The treaty of friendship, commerce, and navigation between the United States of America and the Republic of Honduras, signed on the 28th day of March, 1860, was read the first time. On motion by Mr. Mason, Ordered, That the said treaty, together with the message of the Presi dent and the accompanying documents, be referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations and printed in confidence for the use of the Sen ate. Mr Fitzpatrick, from the Committee on Military Affairs and the Militia, to whom was referred, March 20th, the nomination of Thomas M. Winston, reported. On motion by Mr. Powell, The Senate, by unanimous consent, proceeded to consider the nomination of Thomas M. Winston. On motion by Mr. Hamlin that the further consideration of the said nomination be postponed to to-morrow, It was determined in the negative. Whereupon Resolved, That the Senate advise and consent to the appointment of Thomas M. Winston, agreeably to the nomination. Mr. Rice, from the Committee on Post-Offices and Post-Roads, to whom were referred, March 26th, the nominations of Henry Hunsicker, London Smith, Thomas B. Plunkett, Thomas G. Smith, and Ephraim L. Acker, reported. Whereupon Resolved, That the Senate advise and consent to the appointment of the said persons, agreeably to their nominations respectively. Mr. Clay, from the Committee on Commerce, to whom were referred, March 31st, the nominations of William G. Singleton and A. G. Galloway, reported. Whereupon Resolved, That the Senate advise and consent to the appointments of the said persons, agreeably to their nominatious, respectively. Mr. Mason, from the Committee on Foreign Relations, to whom was referred, March 26th, the convention concluded on the 21st day of March, 1860, between the United States and His Majesty the King of Sweden and Norway, for the mutual surrender of fugitive criminals, reported SATURDAY, APRIL 7, 1860. The following messages were received from the President of the United States, by Mr. Buchanan, his secretary : To the Senate of the United States : I nominate First Lieutenant Dabney H. Maury, of the Regiment of Mounted Riflemen, to be assistant adjutant-general with the brevet rank of captain in the Army of the United States, as proposed by the Secreretary of War. WASHINGTON, April 6, 1860. JAMES BUCHANAN. WAR DEPARTMENT, April 6, 1860. SIR: I have the honor to propose for your approbation the name of First Lieutenant Dabney H. Maury, of the Regiment of Mounted Riflemen, to be assistant adjutant-general, with the brevet rank of captain in the Army of the United States, vice Page, deceased. I am, sir, with great respect, your obedient servant, To the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. To the Senate of the United States : I nominate Oliver Perry Richardson, of Louisiana, to be register of the land office for the New Mexico land district, vice William A. Davidson, resigned. WASHINGTON, D. C., April 7, 1860. To the Senate of the United States : JAMES BUCHANAN. I nominate Hancock Jackson, of Missouri, to be a United States marshall for the eastern district of Missouri, vice Thomas S. Bryant, removed. WASHINGTON, D. C., April 7, 1860. The messages were read. JAMES BUCHANAN. Ordered. That the nomination of Dabney H. Maury be referred to the Committee on Military Affairs and the Militia. On motion by Mr. Slidell, The Senate, by unanimous consent, proceeded to consider the nomination of Oliver Perry Richardson. Whereupon Resolved, That the Senate advise and conseut to the appointment of Oliver Perry Richardson, agreeably to the nomination. On motion by Mr Polk, The Senate, by unanimous consent, proceeded to consider the nomi nation of Hancock Jackson. Whereupon Resolved, That the Senate advise and consent to the appointment of Hancock Jack on, agreeably to the nomination. Mr. Pugh, from the Committee on Public Lands, to whom were referred, the 5th instant, the nominations of Thomas Walke and Joseph P. Baldwin, reported; and Resolved, That the Senate advise and consent to the appointment of |