The article discusses modifications to the tariff in California, specifically regarding military contributions on imports. These modifications include changes to duties on cotton products, allowances for deficiencies in imported goods, an extension of the period for goods to remain in warehouse before duty payment, and exemption of goods imported during the war from new import duties or confiscation by Mexico. The modifications were recommended by the Secretary of the Treasury and approved by President James K. Polk.
The Tariff of 1847: Military Contributions and Economic Shifts in Early California
The excerpt from the document titled "TARIFF," dated June 10, 1847, provides significant insight into the economic policies of the United States during the Mexican-American War, particularly in relation to trade and military operations. The tariff modifications proposed by Secretary of the Treasury R.J. Walker reflect a strategic approach to resource management in occupied territories and demonstrate how economic measures were employed to support military endeavors.
One of the standout features of Walker's recommendations is the imposition of a **“duty as a military contribution of thirty percent ad valorem”** on various manufactured goods. This points to the dual role tariffs played at the time; they were not merely tools of trade regulation, but also instruments of war financing. The fact that these contributions were labeled as “military” reflects the urgency and necessity of funding wartime efforts through whatever means available.
Walker also emphasizes practicality in duty collection by stating that **“the duties shall be collected on the net weight only”** in cases where goods are packaged and that allowances would be made for “deficiencies, leakage, breakage, or damage.” This clause indicates an awareness of the logistical challenges faced during the importation of goods, especially in a war context, where transport could be fraught with difficulties. Such considerations were critical in an era when trade was often disrupted by conflict, and ensuring the economic viability of importing goods was necessary for sustaining military operations.
Furthermore, the extension of the warehousing period from thirty to ninety days illustrates an effort to provide flexibility to merchants engaged in trade under the pressures of wartime logistics. Walker notes that **“within said period of ninety days any portion of the said goods on which the duties...have been paid, may be taken...from the warehouse, and entered free of any further duty,”** which indicates an attempt to stimulate trade and fluidity in commerce under American military governance. This approach likely aimed to foster goodwill among merchants and ensure a steady supply chain for military needs.
Lastly, it is notable that Walker addresses future peace agreements by declaring that it is **“intended to provide by the treaty of peace that all goods imported during the war into any of the Mexican ports in our military possession shall be exempt from any new import duty or confiscation by Mexico.”** This foresight into post-war economic relations indicates an understanding of how tariffs could be used not only as immediate measures but also as instruments of long-term policy that would shape U.S.-Mexico relations after the conflict. Such provisions aimed to reassure traders and businesses that their investments during wartime would not be jeopardized following a potential peace settlement.
In summary, this document reflects a calculated economic strategy intertwined with military necessity during a critical juncture in American history. The modifications to the tariff, alongside the context of the Mexican-American War, reveal how tariffs were employed not just for revenue generation but also for facilitating trade and stabilizing relations under occupation, setting the stage for future economic interactions between the U.S. and Mexico. Through Walker's recommendations, we see the early manifestations of how economic policies are often inextricably linked to military actions and international relations.
In the mid-19th century, California teetered on the brink of transformation, a period marked by the tumult of the Mexican-American War, the whirlwind of the Gold Rush, and sweeping changes in governance and economic frameworks. Among the intriguing artifacts from this era is a document dated June 10, 1847, outlining modifications to tariff regulations poised to impact the nascent Californian ports. This article not only explores the economic fabric of California at this pivotal moment but also delves into the broader implications of tariff policies during a significant chapter in American history.
The mid-1840s were a watershed period for California. Once part of Mexico, California was annexed by the United States in the aftermath of the Mexican-American War (1846-1848). This violent conflict stemmed from a tangled web of manifest destiny, territorial expansion, and diplomatic breakdowns. The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which ended the war in February 1848, would soon formalize American ownership over California and what would later become the Southwest. However, the events leading up to this treaty were already reshaping the political landscape of the region.
As waves of Anglo settlers arrived and gold was discovered in 1848, a mass migration surged forth, forever altering California’s demographic and economic status. Yet, before the gold rush could fully transform the state, the management of imports, exports, and economic regulations was urgently required.
An illuminating letter from R. J. Walker, the Secretary of the Treasury, reveals the complexities of navigating a war economy while adapting to a newly acquired territory. Walker’s proposed modifications were characterized as "military contributions," a term reflecting the pressing realities of wartime logistics and financial necessity. In this context, tariffs assumed a dual purpose—they were not merely means for revenue generation; they were also strategies for sustaining the military presence in Mexico as the U.S. endeavored to stabilize its control over its newly conquered lands.
Among the recommendations was a **30% duty on all cotton and mixed-material goods**, a move that not only generated substantial revenue but also influenced trade patterns. The U.S. government effectively wielded tariffs as a tool to support military operations while simultaneously asserting economic control over the territories it was incorporating.
1. **Duty on Cotton Goods**: By levying a duty on cotton goods—while exempting wool, worsted, and silk—the government positioned cotton as a vital commodity in the American economy. This tariff was intended not only to boost wartime revenues but also to stimulate domestic production.
2. **Collection Procedures**: The outlined procedures for collecting duties based on net weight were designed with the realities of maritime trade in mind, recognizing that issues like leakage and damage were commonplace. As emphasized in the document, "An allowance shall be made for all deficiencies, leakage, breakage, or damage proved to have actually occurred during the voyage..." This acknowledgment of practical challenges illustrated a commitment to fostering trade rather than stifling it through overly punitive measures.
3. **Extended Warehouse Period**: The decision to increase the warehousing period from **30 to 90 days** carried significant implications. By allowing goods to remain longer without incurring immediate duties, the regulations aimed to relieve financial pressures on importers. This extension would give importers the flexibility to navigate a volatile market and ensure their products reached consumers without incurring unnecessary costs.
4. **Exemptions from Future Duties**: The proposed stipulation that goods imported during military control would be exempt from new tariffs once peace was restored conveyed strategic foresight. It was a calculated effort to maintain positive relations with the local Mexican populace during this transition. Encouraging trade and introducing favorable policies were seen as essential to fostering stability in a territory experiencing such sweeping change.
This economic evolution was crucial for supporting the infrastructure that would accommodate the state’s rapid growth. Ports like San Francisco emerged not just as trade hubs but also as vital entry points for those eager to embark on the Californian dream. The ability to import goods without excessive taxation during this transformative era was indispensable for store owners and entrepreneurs striving to meet the demands of a burgeoning population.
As the late 1840s unfolded, the interplay of state and national factors began reshaping California’s economy. The westward expansion of the U.S. catalyzed a framework within which tariffs not only served immediate fiscal goals but also spurred competition in emerging markets.
California's ports became vital conduits for local goods and international trade, each economic interaction contributing to the dawning of a national identity still in its formative stages. The imposition of tariffs proved to be a double-edged sword; while they ensured military funding, excessively high tariffs could stifle burgeoning industries. Walker’s careful balancing act of reduction and regulation was a deliberate strategy to avoid alienating commercial factions in California that sought to grow their businesses amidst the upheaval of war.
Just as in Walker’s time, contemporary tariffs influence global supply chains, consumer prices, and trade relations. Debates surrounding tariffs on products like steel, automotive parts, and technology resonate with historical conversations about establishing fair trade practices while simultaneously promoting national interests.
This historical overview of the tariff system underscores a persistent theme: the intricate balance of national economic priorities and international trade commitments. The tumult and negotiations of the past reveal a timeless truth that still informs today’s economic discourse, illustrating the intersection of local needs, national politics, and global commerce.
In a world where international markets have become increasingly interdependent, examining the past—especially through the lens of the 1847 tariff modifications—offers valuable insights for navigating current and future economic challenges.
The modifications outlined in R. J. Walker's letter and sanctioned by President James K. Polk represent a crucial turning point in California's economic history, marking a shift from military necessity to burgeoning trade opportunities spurred by the Gold Rush. More than mere adjustments to tariffs, these changes encapsulate broader themes of economic expansion and national identity that continue to resonate today.
Understanding the tariffs of 1847 allows us to frame contemporary economic debates within this historical context, reinforcing the notion that decisions made under pressure can echo through time, shaping not only commerce but also the societal structures that emerge alongside evolving economies. As California navigated its formative years, these foundational choices regarding economic policies laid the groundwork for its eventual rise as a global economic powerhouse.
1. **Mexican-American War** - A significant conflict in U.S. history that led to California's annexation. For further reading, see this article on the [Mexican-American War](https://www.history.com/topics/westward-expansion/mexican-american-war).
2. **Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo** - The treaty that formally ended the Mexican-American War. For more information, refer to this summary of the [Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo](https://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/guadalupe-hidalgo).
3. **California Gold Rush** - A major event that transformed California's economy and demographics in the late 1840s. Explore more in this detailed piece on the [California Gold Rush](https://www.history.com/topics/westward-expansion/california-gold-rush).
4. **Tariff policies in the 19th century** - These policies played a crucial role in shaping the economy during the 1800s. For further understanding, check this overview of [19th-century tariffs](https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-economic-hist a/8c2d76046f2e083386bb95aa8a3b8618).
5. **Economic implications of military contributions** - The relationship between military needs and economic shifts during territorial expansion. For in-depth research, visit this analysis of [military economics](https://www.nber.org/papers/w1050).
6. **Impact of tariffs on trade patterns** - The way tariffs influenced imports and exports in the context of wartime economy. Dig deeper with this research on [tariffs and trade](https://www.piie.com/publications/policy-briefs/tariffs-and-trade-evidence-empirical-analysis).
7. **California's demographic transformations** - The effects of the Gold Rush and migration patterns on California's population. For insight, see this paper on the [demographic changes in California](https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/How-the-Gold-Rush-Changed-San-Francisco-12514592.php).
8. **Significance of ports in economic development** - The role of ports like San Francisco in California's growth. Further reading can be found in this article about [ports as economic drivers](https://www.transportation.gov/odapc/publications/importance-us-ports).
9. **Contemporary relevance of historical tariffs** - How past tariff decisions influence current economic policies and debates. Explore this discussion on [tariffs in modern economics](https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/06/how-tariffs-influence-global-economy.html).
10. **Balance of national economic priorities and international trade** - The ongoing tension between domestic policies and global commerce. For a comprehensive overview, see this article on [global trade and national interests](https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2020/01/05/national-interest-in-global-trade).
**Citation**: The Californian
- TARIFF., 1847-12-01
https://cdnc.ucr.edu/ University of California Riverside Digital Newspaper Archive
The following modification of the Tariff does not, by order of the Governor, effect the previous instructions, as to the amount to be levied for duties in any of the ports of California: Treasury Department, June 10th, 1847. Sir:—In compliance with your directions, I have examined the questions presented by the Secretary of War, in regard to the military contributions proposed to be levied in Mexico, under the tariff and regulations sanctioned by you on the 31st of March last, and respectfully recommend the following modifications, namely: 1st. On all manufactures of cotton or of cotton mixed with any other material except wool, worsted and silk in the piece or in any other form, a duty as a military contribution of thirty per cent. ad valorem. 2d. When goods on which the duties are levied by weight, are imported into said ports in the package, the duties shall be collected on the net weight only; and in all cases an allowance shall be made for all deficiencies, leakage, breakage, or damage proved to have actually occurred during the voyage of importation, and made known before the goods are warehoused. 3d. The period named in the eighth of said regulations, during which the goods may remain in warehouse, before the payment of duties, is extended from thirty to ninety days, and within said period of ninety days any portion of the said goods on which the duties, as a military contribution, have been paid, may be taken, after such payment, from the warehouse, and entered free of any further duty at any other port or ports of Mexico in our military possession, the facts of the case, with a particular description of said goods, and a statement that the duties thereon have been paid being certified by the proper officer of the port or ports of reshipment. 4th It is intended to provide by the treaty of peace that all goods imported during the war into any of the Mexican ports in our military possession shall be exempt from any new import duty or confiscation by Mexico in the same manner as if said goods had been imported and paid the import duties prescribed by the Government of Mexico. Most respectfully, Your obedient servant, (Signed) R. J. WALKER, Secretary of the Treasury. To the President. —— The modifications as above recommended by the Secretary of the Treasury, are approved by me, and the Secretary of War and the Secretary of the Navy will give the proper orders to carry them into effect. (Signed) JAMES K. POLK.
One of the standout features of Walker's recommendations is the imposition of a **“duty as a military contribution of thirty percent ad valorem”** on various manufactured goods. This points to the dual role tariffs played at the time; they were not merely tools of trade regulation, but also instruments of war financing. The fact that these contributions were labeled as “military” reflects the urgency and necessity of funding wartime efforts through whatever means available.
Walker also emphasizes practicality in duty collection by stating that **“the duties shall be collected on the net weight only”** in cases where goods are packaged and that allowances would be made for “deficiencies, leakage, breakage, or damage.” This clause indicates an awareness of the logistical challenges faced during the importation of goods, especially in a war context, where transport could be fraught with difficulties. Such considerations were critical in an era when trade was often disrupted by conflict, and ensuring the economic viability of importing goods was necessary for sustaining military operations.
Furthermore, the extension of the warehousing period from thirty to ninety days illustrates an effort to provide flexibility to merchants engaged in trade under the pressures of wartime logistics. Walker notes that **“within said period of ninety days any portion of the said goods on which the duties...have been paid, may be taken...from the warehouse, and entered free of any further duty,”** which indicates an attempt to stimulate trade and fluidity in commerce under American military governance. This approach likely aimed to foster goodwill among merchants and ensure a steady supply chain for military needs.
Lastly, it is notable that Walker addresses future peace agreements by declaring that it is **“intended to provide by the treaty of peace that all goods imported during the war into any of the Mexican ports in our military possession shall be exempt from any new import duty or confiscation by Mexico.”** This foresight into post-war economic relations indicates an understanding of how tariffs could be used not only as immediate measures but also as instruments of long-term policy that would shape U.S.-Mexico relations after the conflict. Such provisions aimed to reassure traders and businesses that their investments during wartime would not be jeopardized following a potential peace settlement.
In summary, this document reflects a calculated economic strategy intertwined with military necessity during a critical juncture in American history. The modifications to the tariff, alongside the context of the Mexican-American War, reveal how tariffs were employed not just for revenue generation but also for facilitating trade and stabilizing relations under occupation, setting the stage for future economic interactions between the U.S. and Mexico. Through Walker's recommendations, we see the early manifestations of how economic policies are often inextricably linked to military actions and international relations.
The Tariff of 1847: Military Contributions and Economic Shifts in Early California
In the mid-19th century, California teetered on the brink of transformation, a period marked by the tumult of the Mexican-American War, the whirlwind of the Gold Rush, and sweeping changes in governance and economic frameworks. Among the intriguing artifacts from this era is a document dated June 10, 1847, outlining modifications to tariff regulations poised to impact the nascent Californian ports. This article not only explores the economic fabric of California at this pivotal moment but also delves into the broader implications of tariff policies during a significant chapter in American history.
Historical Context
The mid-1840s were a watershed period for California. Once part of Mexico, California was annexed by the United States in the aftermath of the Mexican-American War (1846-1848). This violent conflict stemmed from a tangled web of manifest destiny, territorial expansion, and diplomatic breakdowns. The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which ended the war in February 1848, would soon formalize American ownership over California and what would later become the Southwest. However, the events leading up to this treaty were already reshaping the political landscape of the region.As waves of Anglo settlers arrived and gold was discovered in 1848, a mass migration surged forth, forever altering California’s demographic and economic status. Yet, before the gold rush could fully transform the state, the management of imports, exports, and economic regulations was urgently required.
Tariffs and Military Contributions
An illuminating letter from R. J. Walker, the Secretary of the Treasury, reveals the complexities of navigating a war economy while adapting to a newly acquired territory. Walker’s proposed modifications were characterized as "military contributions," a term reflecting the pressing realities of wartime logistics and financial necessity. In this context, tariffs assumed a dual purpose—they were not merely means for revenue generation; they were also strategies for sustaining the military presence in Mexico as the U.S. endeavored to stabilize its control over its newly conquered lands.Among the recommendations was a **30% duty on all cotton and mixed-material goods**, a move that not only generated substantial revenue but also influenced trade patterns. The U.S. government effectively wielded tariffs as a tool to support military operations while simultaneously asserting economic control over the territories it was incorporating.
Breakdown of the Recommended Modifications
Let's delve deeper into the key modifications outlined in Walker’s document, each a strategic maneuver aimed at addressing the unique challenges of this transitional period.1. **Duty on Cotton Goods**: By levying a duty on cotton goods—while exempting wool, worsted, and silk—the government positioned cotton as a vital commodity in the American economy. This tariff was intended not only to boost wartime revenues but also to stimulate domestic production.
2. **Collection Procedures**: The outlined procedures for collecting duties based on net weight were designed with the realities of maritime trade in mind, recognizing that issues like leakage and damage were commonplace. As emphasized in the document, "An allowance shall be made for all deficiencies, leakage, breakage, or damage proved to have actually occurred during the voyage..." This acknowledgment of practical challenges illustrated a commitment to fostering trade rather than stifling it through overly punitive measures.
3. **Extended Warehouse Period**: The decision to increase the warehousing period from **30 to 90 days** carried significant implications. By allowing goods to remain longer without incurring immediate duties, the regulations aimed to relieve financial pressures on importers. This extension would give importers the flexibility to navigate a volatile market and ensure their products reached consumers without incurring unnecessary costs.
4. **Exemptions from Future Duties**: The proposed stipulation that goods imported during military control would be exempt from new tariffs once peace was restored conveyed strategic foresight. It was a calculated effort to maintain positive relations with the local Mexican populace during this transition. Encouraging trade and introducing favorable policies were seen as essential to fostering stability in a territory experiencing such sweeping change.
Impact on Trade and Economic Structures
These modifications not only reflected the immediate needs of wartime America but also highlighted broader trends in American economic policies of the era. While military funding drove the rationale behind these tariffs, they would eventually pivot towards commercial interests. As California’s population surged and the Gold Rush lured countless prospectors, the economic landscape began shifting from military contributions to the establishment of robust trade systems.This economic evolution was crucial for supporting the infrastructure that would accommodate the state’s rapid growth. Ports like San Francisco emerged not just as trade hubs but also as vital entry points for those eager to embark on the Californian dream. The ability to import goods without excessive taxation during this transformative era was indispensable for store owners and entrepreneurs striving to meet the demands of a burgeoning population.
California and National Economics: A Unified System
As the late 1840s unfolded, the interplay of state and national factors began reshaping California’s economy. The westward expansion of the U.S. catalyzed a framework within which tariffs not only served immediate fiscal goals but also spurred competition in emerging markets.California's ports became vital conduits for local goods and international trade, each economic interaction contributing to the dawning of a national identity still in its formative stages. The imposition of tariffs proved to be a double-edged sword; while they ensured military funding, excessively high tariffs could stifle burgeoning industries. Walker’s careful balancing act of reduction and regulation was a deliberate strategy to avoid alienating commercial factions in California that sought to grow their businesses amidst the upheaval of war.
The Legacy of Tariffs in Today’s Context
Fast forward to the present day, and tariffs have assumed center stage once more in discussions surrounding international trade and domestic economics. Often viewed as tools for protecting American industries, tariffs today come with complexities akin to those faced in 1847.Just as in Walker’s time, contemporary tariffs influence global supply chains, consumer prices, and trade relations. Debates surrounding tariffs on products like steel, automotive parts, and technology resonate with historical conversations about establishing fair trade practices while simultaneously promoting national interests.
This historical overview of the tariff system underscores a persistent theme: the intricate balance of national economic priorities and international trade commitments. The tumult and negotiations of the past reveal a timeless truth that still informs today’s economic discourse, illustrating the intersection of local needs, national politics, and global commerce.
In a world where international markets have become increasingly interdependent, examining the past—especially through the lens of the 1847 tariff modifications—offers valuable insights for navigating current and future economic challenges.
Conclusion
The modifications outlined in R. J. Walker's letter and sanctioned by President James K. Polk represent a crucial turning point in California's economic history, marking a shift from military necessity to burgeoning trade opportunities spurred by the Gold Rush. More than mere adjustments to tariffs, these changes encapsulate broader themes of economic expansion and national identity that continue to resonate today.Understanding the tariffs of 1847 allows us to frame contemporary economic debates within this historical context, reinforcing the notion that decisions made under pressure can echo through time, shaping not only commerce but also the societal structures that emerge alongside evolving economies. As California navigated its formative years, these foundational choices regarding economic policies laid the groundwork for its eventual rise as a global economic powerhouse.
Key Phrases:
1. **Mexican-American War** - A significant conflict in U.S. history that led to California's annexation. For further reading, see this article on the [Mexican-American War](https://www.history.com/topics/westward-expansion/mexican-american-war).2. **Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo** - The treaty that formally ended the Mexican-American War. For more information, refer to this summary of the [Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo](https://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/guadalupe-hidalgo).
3. **California Gold Rush** - A major event that transformed California's economy and demographics in the late 1840s. Explore more in this detailed piece on the [California Gold Rush](https://www.history.com/topics/westward-expansion/california-gold-rush).
4. **Tariff policies in the 19th century** - These policies played a crucial role in shaping the economy during the 1800s. For further understanding, check this overview of [19th-century tariffs](https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-economic-hist a/8c2d76046f2e083386bb95aa8a3b8618).
5. **Economic implications of military contributions** - The relationship between military needs and economic shifts during territorial expansion. For in-depth research, visit this analysis of [military economics](https://www.nber.org/papers/w1050).
6. **Impact of tariffs on trade patterns** - The way tariffs influenced imports and exports in the context of wartime economy. Dig deeper with this research on [tariffs and trade](https://www.piie.com/publications/policy-briefs/tariffs-and-trade-evidence-empirical-analysis).
7. **California's demographic transformations** - The effects of the Gold Rush and migration patterns on California's population. For insight, see this paper on the [demographic changes in California](https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/How-the-Gold-Rush-Changed-San-Francisco-12514592.php).
8. **Significance of ports in economic development** - The role of ports like San Francisco in California's growth. Further reading can be found in this article about [ports as economic drivers](https://www.transportation.gov/odapc/publications/importance-us-ports).
9. **Contemporary relevance of historical tariffs** - How past tariff decisions influence current economic policies and debates. Explore this discussion on [tariffs in modern economics](https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/06/how-tariffs-influence-global-economy.html).
10. **Balance of national economic priorities and international trade** - The ongoing tension between domestic policies and global commerce. For a comprehensive overview, see this article on [global trade and national interests](https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2020/01/05/national-interest-in-global-trade).
**Citation**: The Californian
- TARIFF., 1847-12-01
https://cdnc.ucr.edu/ University of California Riverside Digital Newspaper Archive
Original Article:
The following modification of the Tariff does not, by order of the Governor, effect the previous instructions, as to the amount to be levied for duties in any of the ports of California: Treasury Department, June 10th, 1847. Sir:—In compliance with your directions, I have examined the questions presented by the Secretary of War, in regard to the military contributions proposed to be levied in Mexico, under the tariff and regulations sanctioned by you on the 31st of March last, and respectfully recommend the following modifications, namely: 1st. On all manufactures of cotton or of cotton mixed with any other material except wool, worsted and silk in the piece or in any other form, a duty as a military contribution of thirty per cent. ad valorem. 2d. When goods on which the duties are levied by weight, are imported into said ports in the package, the duties shall be collected on the net weight only; and in all cases an allowance shall be made for all deficiencies, leakage, breakage, or damage proved to have actually occurred during the voyage of importation, and made known before the goods are warehoused. 3d. The period named in the eighth of said regulations, during which the goods may remain in warehouse, before the payment of duties, is extended from thirty to ninety days, and within said period of ninety days any portion of the said goods on which the duties, as a military contribution, have been paid, may be taken, after such payment, from the warehouse, and entered free of any further duty at any other port or ports of Mexico in our military possession, the facts of the case, with a particular description of said goods, and a statement that the duties thereon have been paid being certified by the proper officer of the port or ports of reshipment. 4th It is intended to provide by the treaty of peace that all goods imported during the war into any of the Mexican ports in our military possession shall be exempt from any new import duty or confiscation by Mexico in the same manner as if said goods had been imported and paid the import duties prescribed by the Government of Mexico. Most respectfully, Your obedient servant, (Signed) R. J. WALKER, Secretary of the Treasury. To the President. —— The modifications as above recommended by the Secretary of the Treasury, are approved by me, and the Secretary of War and the Secretary of the Navy will give the proper orders to carry them into effect. (Signed) JAMES K. POLK.
