I transmit herewith, in reply to the resolution of the Senate of January 23, 1897, a report from the Secretary of State, accompanied by copies of the correspondence therein requested, relating to the Nicaraguan Canal or the Maritime Canal Company of Nicaragua, since 1887.

To the Senate:I transmit herewith, in response to the resolution of the Senate of February 24, 1897, a report from the Secretary of State, in relation to the claim of M. A. Cheek against the Siamese Government, with accompanying papers.

When we consider these provisions of the bill in connection with our long northern frontier and the boundaries of our States and Territories, often but an imaginary line separating them from the British dominions, and recall the friendly intercourse between the people who are neighbors on either side, the provisions of this bill affecting them must be regarded as illiberal, narrow, and un-American.

I have not thought it compatible with the public interest that the correspondence referred to in the resolution should be communicated pending the public and exhaustive investigation about to be instituted.

It is not claimed, I believe, that the time has come for the further restriction of immigration on the ground that an excess of population overcrowds our land.

The time is quite within recent memory when the same thing was said of immigrants who, with their descendants, are now numbered among our best citizens.

A radical departure from our national policy relating to immigration is here presented.

In my opinion, it is infinitely more safe to admit a hundred thousand immigrants who, though unable to read and write, seek among us only a home and opportunity to work than to admit one of those unruly agitators and enemies of governmental control who can not only read and write, but delights in arousing by inflammatory speech the illiterate and peacefully inclined to discontent and tumult.

A careful examination of this bill has convinced me that for the reasons given and others not specifically stated its provisions are unnecessarily harsh and oppressive.

The ability to read and write, as required in this bill, in and of itself affords, in my opinion, a misleading test of contented industry and supplies unsatisfactory evidence of desirable citizenship or a proper apprehension of the benefits of our institutions.

This requirement proceeds upon the assumption that the foreign relatives coming here are in every case, by reason of poverty, liable to become a public charge unless the immigrant is capable of their support.