periods. These statutes, however, do not authorize the payment of
the troops in the absence of specific appropriations therefor. The
Constitution has wisely provided that "no money shall be drawn from
the Treasury but in consequence of appropriations made by law;" and
it has also been declared by statute that "no department of the
Government shall expend in any one fiscal year any sum in excess
of appropriations made by Congress for that fiscal year." We have,
therefore, an Army in service, authorized by law and entitled to be
paid, but no funds available for that purpose.

It may also be said, as an additional incentive to prompt action by
Congress, that since the commencement of the fiscal year the Army,
though without pay, has been constantly and actively employed in
arduous and dangerous service, in the performance of which both
officers and men have discharged their duty with fidelity and
courage and without complaint. These circumstances, in my judgment,
constituted an extraordinary occasion requiring that Congress be
convened in advance of the time prescribed by law for your meeting in
regular session. The importance of speedy action upon this subject
on the part of Congress is so manifest that I venture to suggest the
propriety of making the necessary appropriations for the support
of the Army for the current year at its present maximum numerical
strength of 25,000 men, leaving for future consideration all questions
relating to an increase or decrease of the number of enlisted men.
In the event of the reduction of the Army by subsequent legislation
during the fiscal year, the excess of the appropriation could not
be expended; and in the event of its enlargement the additional sum
required for the payment of the extra force could be provided in due
time. It would be unjust to the troops now in service, and whose pay
is already largely in arrears, if payment to them should be further