eaty restraints of disputed interpretation the relative
positions of the United States and Canada as near neighbors, the growth
of our joint commerce, the development and prosperity of both countries,
which amicable relations surely guarantee, and, above all, the
liberality always extended by the United States to the people of Canada
furnished motives for kindness and consideration higher and better than
treaty covenants.

While keenly sensitive to all that was exasperating in the condition and
by no means indisposed to support the just complaints of our injured
citizens, I still deemed it my duty, for the preservation of important
American interests which were directly involved, and in view of all the
details of the situation, to attempt by negotiation to remedy existing
wrongs and to finally terminate by a fair and just treaty these
ever-recurring causes of difficulty.

I fully believe that the treaty just rejected by the Senate was well
suited to the exigency, and that its provisions were adequate for our
security in the future from vexatious incidents and for the promotion of
friendly neighborhood and intimacy, without sacrificing in the least our
national pride or dignity.

I am quite conscious that neither my opinion of the value of the
rejected treaty nor the motives which prompted its negotiation are of
importance in the light of the judgment of the Senate thereupon. But it
is of importance to note that this treaty has been rejected without any
apparent disposition on the part of the Senate to alter or amend its
provisions, and with the evident intention, not wanting expression, that
no negotiation should at present be concluded touching the matter at
issue.

The cooperation necessary for the adjustment of the long-standing
national differences with which we have to deal by methods of conference
and agreement having thus been declined, I am by no means disposed to
abandon the interests and the rights of our people in the premises or to
neglect their grievances; and I therefore turn to the contemplation of a
plan of retaliation as a mode which still remains of treating the
situation.

I am not unmindful of the gravity of the responsibility assumed in
adopting this line of conduct, nor do I fail in the least to appreciate
its serious consequences. It will be impossible to injure our Canadian
neighbors by retaliatory measures without inflicting some damage upon
our own citizens. This results from our proximit