H. OF R.] State Banks as Depositories-Mr. Adams' Resolution. the gentleman from Tennessee on the present occasion, and extended their inquiries beyond the limits fixed by the House, and into matters still more out of their proper province, and then what were the consequences ? Were they not such as might fairly have been expected to ensue? Their right to make them was denied. They were refused. They came back, and from this took upon themselves to report that the bank had violated its charter, not on those grounds of violation into which they were sent to inquire, but because the bank had refused, and properly refused, to answer such inquiries as they had assumed the right to demand. The gentlemen were sent to get information as to alleged violations of the charter. They got no information at all, for the reason he had stated; and then they came back to those who sent them, breathing vengeance, talking of violations of the charter of the bank, of contempt committed by it to the authority of the House, for which they must be brought to condign punishment. And, as a means to inflict it, they forthwith report a series of resolutions, that the president and directors should be brought to the bar of the House to answer for the same. What else resulted from this? The conduct of the bank was, to be sure, a contempt, a high contempt in the imagination of the committee, of the privileges of the House; and yet, notwithstanding all this, eager as these gentlemen of the committee were so to deem it, he had not seen that they were quite so anxious to bring up the subject, that, if what they had alleged was a contempt, the indignation of the House might fall upon those whom they had described so forcibly as having incurred it. Mr. POLK had not expected, he said, when he came to the House this morning, that it would be necessary for him to engage in a further discussion of the subject before them; but as the honorable member from Massachusetts had revived the discussion of a former day, and had been pleased to indulge in a course of remarks not very pertinent to the immediate question before the House, he must advert to such of them as seemed to require from him some notice. The gentleman repeats the request which he had made when this resolution was last under consideration, a few days past, that he (Mr. P.) would withdraw the amendment which he had had the honor to propose. Mr. P. begged, in the outset of what he had to say, to state that it was not his intention to withdraw the amendment. The honorable member, by his resolution, proposes to call upon the Secretary of the Treasury for certain information relating to the State banks which had become the depositories of the public money. He states his object to be to ascertain the condition of these banks, and more especially of the private accounts and indebtedness of their respective presidents and boards of directors, and to learn [JUNE, 1834. also the names of those persons who were employed as their lawyers and solicitors-with the view, as he states, to enable himself and others to determine whether these banks are safe depositories of the public money. The object of the amendment was to make the inquiry broad enough to embrace a call for similar information as regards the Bank of the United States; to extend a similar inquiry into the state of the accounts of the president and directors of that bank also; and to ascertain the names of the lawyers and solicitors of the Bank of the United States, and their indebtedness to that bank. To this the gentleman objects, and insists that it is proper the amend ment should be withdrawn. The Government had still in the vaults of the Bank of the United States some two or three millions of public deposits, which had not yet been withdrawn from it. The United States was, moreover, the holder of one-fifth (seven millions) of its stock. Was it unreasonable, then, if such an inquiry as was proposed to be made was deemed necessary as regarded the State banks, to extend the same or a similar inquiry into the affairs of a bank in which the people of the United States had so great a stake! Inquiry into its condition, in this respect, was the more peculiarly demanded, when the antagonist position which it had assumed towards the Government was considered. What had been its conduct towards the Exec utive, and towards this House? Had it not, in its official acts, and through its friends and advocates here and elsewhere, openly denounc ed the chief Executive Magistrate as a tyrant, a usurper, and a despot-as every thing but a patriot and an honest man? Had it not, by itself and its friends, advocates, and presses, in the progress of the present session of Congress, called upon this House to join in the hue and cry against the Executive, for an alleged usurpation of power? When this call was made, the bank and its supporters and advo cates conceded that the institution was respon sible for its acts to Congress, and the full power of Congress over the whole subject was admitted. The House had proved to be refrac tory, and, by its votes, had sustained the Executive, and in effect declared the charge of usurpation, tyranny, and despotism, against the President, was senseless as well as false clamor, and wholly unfounded; and no sooner was this done than the bank and its friends had come out in bitter denunciations against the popular branch of Congress. Yes, sir, this House, the immediate representatives of the people, the true reflectors (when its members truly represent their constituents) of the popular will, had, since the return of the committee of investigation from Philadelphia, as he would presently show, been denounced, with the President, as usurpers of powers which did not belong to them. Were we to endure all this from an institution whose strides for power were not only rapid bat JUNE, 1834.] State Banks as Depositories-Mr. Adams' Resolution. arrogant, and yet be told that we had no right to exercise a power, expressly reserved to us by the charter, of examining into the malpractices or corrupt conduct of its managers, or looking into its condition? But, according to the gentleman, this immaculate and inoffensive Bank of the United States must not be looked into, though the affairs of the State banks must be thoroughly probed. Again, he thought it more peculiarly proper to carry the inquiry into the concerns of the United States Bank, because a committee of the House, appointed to investigate its affairs, by a vote of 170 members, had gone to Philadephia with the very inquiries which were now proposed to be made into the State banks, and had been insultingly repulsed. The House, through its committee, had called for the very information which the gentleman now seeks from the State deposit banks; and yet, what was the reply of the Bank of the United States? When the committee of this House called, among other things, for the names of the lawyers and solicitors employed by it, and their indebtedness to the bank, did the bank furnish the information? Did they determine to comply with the call of Congress through its committee? No. They reply, by their official organ, that Congress was not authorized to demand it. That a committee, sent to the bank by Congress for that purpose, had no power to call for such information. Would this be denied? If it was so, then he held in his hands the proof. [Here Mr. P. read from the documents appended to the report of the committee of investigation the following resolution, adopted by them whilst at Philadelphia, viz.: "Resolved, That the president, directors, and company of the Bank of the United States be requested to furnish this committee with the particular items, and the aggregate of all fees and compensation paid during each year to attorneys, counsellors, or lawyers, since the establishment of the bank; stating the amount paid to each person employed, together with their residence; the times when the payments were made, and the particular services rendered for each charge paid; also, whether the same has been paid at the parent bank or branches, and at which, designating them; also, of all sums paid as a general or annual fee or salary to counsellors for the bank, specifying the names of such persons, the amounts, and times, and places of payment; and, also, whether such sums were paid by the order, in each case, of the board of directors, or how other wise paid; designating such sums as have been paid in cash, and such as may have been passed to the credit of such persons or others, in payment of any debt or debts due to said bank."] And what, said Mr. P., was the reply of the bank to this and other calls made upon them by the committee for information? Why, that "the board do not feel themselves at liberty to comply with the requirements of the resolutions of the committee of investigation," &c. He would, he said, read a part of the bank's reply. It was as follows, viz. : [H. or R. "BANK OF THE UNITED STATES, May 3, 1834. "At a special meeting of the board, held this day, the following resolution was, on motion, unanimously adopted: 64 Resolved, That the board do not feel themselves at liberty to comply with the requirement of the resolutions of the committee of investigation of the 29th ultimo and 1st instant, and do not think they are bound to do so, inasmuch as, in respect to a part of the papers called for, the effect would be the same as the surrender of their books and papers to a secret and ex parte examination, which they have already refused to consent to." Under such circumstances, he could not conceive that he was violating any rule of order or propriety, in insisting that, if the inquiry proposed by the gentleman from Massachusetts was to be made, that it was equally due to the country and to Congress to have such examination made also into the affairs and management of the institution in which the Government had not only a large interest, in addition to the deposits still remaining with it, but which had resisted the authority of the House, and was bidding them defiance. He considered it most unreasonable to be asked to withdraw the amendment calling for it. He should hope it would be deemed much more reasonable for him to ask the honorable member from Massachusetts to modify his resolution by inserting, along with the State banks, that of the United States Bank. He hoped that he would not be told, in objection to the call proposed by his amendment, that it was useless for him to press it, because the president and directors had already refused the same information when demanded by the committee; and that, therefore, they would refuse that demanded by his amendment. This was not a sufficient answer, although it was not to be denied that, from their previous conduct, such might be the result. Should it be so, he desired the House should know it. He admitted that it had so arrogantly set itself up to determine the whole public policy, dictate whether any or what powers properly belonged to the Executive department and to Congress, that he knew not where it might be said that its claims were to terminate. Mr. P. said he had stated that though the bank, through its organs and advocates, at the early periods of the present session of Congress, when we were appealed to join in damning and putting down the chief Executive Magistrate, had lavished unmeasured praises upon us, had conceded to us the power which this House afterwards exercised, and had professed a willingness to yield obedience to our decision upon the great question which has occupied so much of our time, that yet when this House had condemned the bank, and sustained the President, we had shared in its denunciations. This he happened to have it in his power very briefly to show. A paper had this moment been handed to him by a H. OF R.] State Banks as Depositories-Mr. Adams' Resolution. [JUNE, 1834. gentleman near him, which he had read some In the same paper the inquiries made by the days ago. The paper (the National Gazette) committee of investigation are denounced as a contained an article purporting to be editorial,"mass of arrogance," because they had called but which bore on its face evidence that it was for certain correspondence with the bank, the semi-official, indeed it might be regarded which the bank refused to furnish. The bank, as the official expose, issuing from the bank he said, in this paper, which was evidently itself because it contained an extract of what prepared under its own direction, defied and purported to be a private letter, addressed by insulted the House of Representatives. After a private citizen to the bank, and which could setting itself up in opposition to the Government, have been procured from no other source but assuming to construe the powers of the Execu the bank itself. From that expose he begged tive, and to dispute what authority he should to read a paragraph or two, to show its general and should not exercise, it now abuses and tone, and particularly what was said of this denounces this House. House. He would only further state that it appears in the paper of the 3d of June, and after the report of the committee of investigation was made to this House. Mr. P. here read from the expose as follows, viz.: Mr. J. Q. ADAMS here interrupted Mr. POLK, and called on the member from Tennessee to state the evidence upon which he made these charges. Mr. POLK held it in his hand. It is, as he had already stated, what purports to be "The House, it cannot be dissembled, has lost editorial, but comes to the public under the much of the confidence of the country, and has lost sanction of the bank; if it was not written, it by inattention to its own character. They have as he believed it was, by the direction of the been much too servile-have permitted themselves to bank itself. The paper furnishes intrinsic be the dupes of political jugglers. It is a fact per- evidence of its authorship; for it contains a fectly notorious that a very large portion of the letter which could not have been procured but House, outside of the bar, acknowledge the improper from the bank. Yes, sir, the bank, which was conduct of the Executive, yet step forward a few so scrupulous in regard to private correspondfeet and vote to support the very measures they disapprove. The House ought to be ashamed of such conduct; there are really many honest and wellmeaning men in that body, and they ought to revolt at the humiliation to which the kitchen cabinet sub jects them. The present feeling of the country towards the House is one of surprise and pity. Surprise, that a popular body should seem so indifferent to popular rights; and pity, that it should suffer the control of these political jugglers. If, hereafter, that body should be despised, it will only be because it has made itself despicable. If it be treated with contempt, it will be because it is contemptible." Again, he said, this bank expose (for he held himself justified in supposing that it had the sanction of the bank, for garbled extracts of the private correspondence of the bank formed a part of it) held the following language, which he read, viz.: "The great contest now waging in this country is ence, had not hesitated to avail itself of a private letter, with a view to assail members of this House. Mr. ADAMS begged to know what proof he had of this? Mr. POLK. The proof is on the face of it: it bears internal evidence that it must have come from the bank. He found in it, as he had already stated, an extract of a letter addressed to the bank by a private citizen, and which could not find its way into this, the bank's known organ in Philadelphia, (the National Gazette,) without the knowledge or connivance of the bank, or, indeed, without having been furnished by the bank. This is a private letter addressed to the bank by a private individual on his private affairs; and we thus, notwithstanding the bank's objection to disclose to a committee of the House, when called upon for that purpose, the correspondence called for touching its "fair business transactions," nevertheless does not hesitate to blazon forth, under such circumstances, a garbled extract of what should, by its professions, be held sacred, for the base purpose, he must conclude, of blasting the character or affecting the reputation of a member of the committee. He would now read on, to show the character of this immaculate institution. between its free institutions and the violence of a vulgar despotism. The Government is turned into a baneful faction, and the spirit of liberty contends against it throughout the country. On the one hand is this miserable cabal, with all the patronage of the Executive; on the other the yet unbroken mind and heart of the country, with the Senate and the bank; the House of Representatives, hitherto the instinctive champion of freedom, shaken by the intrigues of the kitchen, hesitates for a time, but cannot fail, before long, to break its own fetters first, and then those of the country. In that quarrel, we predict, [Mr. P. here read some other extracts.] they who administer the bank will shrink from no calls for information made by this House The bank, then, had refused to answer the proper share which the country may assign to them; personally they must be as indifferent as any of their through its committee; but he supposed that fellow-citizens to the recharter of the bank. But a full answer would be found in an extraor they will not suffer themselves, nor the institution intrusted to them, to be the instrument of private wrong and public outrage; nor will they omit any effort to rescue the institutions of the country from being trodden under foot by a faction of interlopers." dinary ground of defence for the malconduct of the bank, to be seen in another document, (the report of the minority of the Committee of Ways and Means on the deposit question, at the present session,) viz.: "In relation to all the operations of the bank included under the first head, it must be answered that, whether the bank has been right or wrong, her board of directors assert the legal right to do whatever has been done." There, indeed, it was openly asserted that the directors had full right to refuse compliance with what the House had so solemnly resolved they deemed necessary to have to aid them in their legislative duties. Mr. P., after commenting with severity on the general conduct of the bank, concluded by asserting that he had no possible objection to any inquiry that could be instituted, to ascertain the condition of the State banks; but, if the present resolution was adopted, he felt it necessary to insist upon having the other inquiry into the United States Bank along with it. He could not think of voting for a scrutiny of this character into the State banks, who had already voluntarily answered every call made upon them by the Secretary of the Treasury fully; and were, he doubted not, willing to answer any call which Congress might choose to make; and yet not extend the same call to that bank, which had, in refusing the same information to a committee, put at defiance the authority of the House, and put at naught its power. He wished to see whether it would again refuse to answer the call, when a similar one was made, by its friends upon this floor, upon the State banks. He did not wish to evade the investigation into the concerns of the local banks, but he wished also to carry it into the affairs of the Bank of the United States-an institution which some regard as the sole agent of the Government. The bank issues its bulletin, and declares that you have no power; that they stand above your reach; and you are now requested modestly to decline asking the bank any more questions. He shrunk from no scrutiny into the affairs of the local banks, and had no objection to the object of the resolution of the gentleman from Massachusetts. The resolution was further debated by Mr. WAYNE, but before he had concluded the hour devoted to morning business expired. Mr. CLAY called for the order of the day. Mr. MILLER thereupon rose and moved a suspension of the rule, to enable the House to dispose of the resolution. The House having refused to suspend the rule, the subject stands over. The Removal of the Deposits-The Two Joint Resolved, by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the reasons communicated by the Secretary of the Treasury in his report to Congress of the 4th of December, 1833, for the removal of the deposits of the money of the United States from the Bank of the United States and its branches, are insufficient and unsatisfactory. [H. OF R. Mr. POLK moved that it be laid on the table. Mr. WARREN R. DAVIS rose to ask the honorable member from Tennessee, (Mr. PoLK,) whether the object of his motion was to dispose of this subject finally, or merely to have it laid on the table for the present? Mr. POLK declined answering. The question before the House was not, he presumed, debatable; and it was for the House to say what the final disposition of the resolution should be. Mr. CHILTON said he rose to propound an inquiry to the honorable member. Mr. POLK said he must object to this; and rose to a question of order, whether it was in order to propound inquiries on a question not debatable? The SPEAKER intimated that, although the question was not debatable, the honorable member had a right to propound an inquiry simply. Mr. CHILTON then made a few remarks; upon which, Mr. PoLk rose in objection, and made a point of order thereon; upon which, Mr. DENNY rose, not, he said, to propound an inquiry to the honorable member from Tennessee, who appeared so sensitive, but to ask the Speaker whether, if a majority should now decide to lay the subject on the table, it was competent, during the rest of the session, for a majority to take it up again? The SPEAKER replying in the affirmativeThe question on the motion was then put, and decided by-yeas 114, nays 101. So the said joint resolution was ordered to lie on the table. Restoration of the Deposits. The following joint resolution from the Senate then coming up, viz. : United States which may accrue or be received on Resolved, That all deposits of the money of the and after the 1st day of July, 1834, shall be made with the Bank of the United States and its branches, in conformity with the provisions of the act entitled "An act to incorporate the subscribers to the Bank of the United States," approved the 10th of April, 1816 Mr. POLK moved that this resolution also should be laid on the table. Mr. CHILTON called for the yeas and nays; which having been ordered The question upon the motion to lay it on the table was put, and decided as follows 118 to 98: YEAS.-Messrs. John Adams, William Allen, Anthony, Bean, Beardsley, Beaumont, Blair, Bockee, Bodle, Boon, Bouldin, Brown, Bunch, Burns, Bynum, Cambreleng, Carmichael, Carr, Casey, Chaney, Chinn, Samuel Clark, Clay, Coffee, Connor, Coulter, Cramer, Day, Philemon Dickerson, David W. Dickinson, Dunlap, Felder, Forester, Fowler, W. K. Fuller, Gholson, Gillet, Gilmer, Joseph Hall, Halsey, Hamer, Joseph M. Harper, Harrison, Hathaway, Hawkins, Hawes, Henderson, Howell, Hubbard, Abel Huntington, Inge, Jarvis, Richard M. Johnson, Noa H. or R.] Local Bank Regulation Deposit Bill. diah Johnson, Cave Johnson, Seaborn Jones, Benjamin Jones, Kavanagh, Kinnard, Lane, Lansing, Laporte, Luke Lea, Thos. Lee, Leavitt, Loyal, Lyon, Lytle, Abijah Mann, Joel K. Mann, Mardis, Moses Mason, McIntire, McKay, McKim, McKinley, McLene, McVean, Miller, Henry Mitchell, Robert Mitchell, Muhlenberg, Murphy, Osgood, Page, Parks, Parker, Patton, Patterson, Dutee J. Pearce, Peyton, Franklin Pierce, Pierson, Plummer, Polk, Pope, Schenck, Schley, Shinn, Charles Slade, Smith, Speight, Standefer, Stoddert, Sutherland, William Taylor, Francis Thomas, Thomson, Turrill, Vanderpoel, Van Houten, Wagener, Ward, Wardwell, Wayne, Webster, Whallon, Campbell P. White-118. NAYS.-Messrs. John Quincy Adams, Heman Allen, John J. Allen, C. Allan, Archer, Ashley, Banks, Barber, Barnitz, Barringer, Baylies, Beaty, James M. Bell, Binney, Briggs, Bull, Burd, Burges, Cage, Campbell, Chambers, Chilton, Choate, Wm. Clark, Clayton, Clowney, Corwin, Crane, Crockett, Darlington, Warren R. Davis, Deberry, Denny, Dickson, Duncan, Evans, Edward Everett, Horace Everett, Ewing, Fillmore, Foster, Philo C. Fuller, Fulton, Gamble, Garland, Gordon, Gorham, Graham, Grayson, Grennell, Griffin, Hiland Hall, Hard, Hardin, James Harper, Hazeltine, Heath, Heister, Jabez W. Huntington, Jackson, William Cost Johnson, King, Lay, Lewis, Lincoln, Love, Martindale, Marshall, McCarty, McComas, McKennan, Mercer, Milligan, Moore, Pinckney, Potts, Ramsay, Reed, Rencher, Selden, Augustine H. Shepperd, William Slade, Sloane, Spangler, Steele, Stewart, Philemon Thomas, Tompkins, Turner, Tweedy, Vance, Vinton, Edward D. White, Frederick Whittlesey, Elisha Whittlesey, Williams, Wise, Young-98. [JUNE, 1834. lars, and the principle involved differed in nothing from the conventional value of a bank note. Mr. SELDEN agreed to the views expressed by Mr. BINNEY, but hoped the bill would be carried into the House, and discussed there. drew an amendment he had prepared and proMr. BINNEY, assenting to this course, withposed to the committee. FRIDAY, June 20. Local Bank Regulation Deposit Bill. The House took up the bill regulating the deposits of the money of the United States in certain local banks. The bill having been read, Mr. PoLK addressed the House. Mr. Speaker: The bill upon your table has been prepared and brought forward by the Committee of Ways and Means, in accordance with the principles understood to be settled by the resolution of the House, which affirmed "that the State banks ought to be continued as the place of deposit of the public money, and that it is expedient for Congress to make further provision by law, prescribing the mode of selec tion, the securities to be taken, and the manner and terms on which they are to be employed." The bill is designed, so far as legislative provisions are deemed proper, to carry that resolution into effect. In the report of the Committee of Ways and Means, submitted to the House upon a former So this resolution was also ordered to lie upon day of the session, and which concluded with the table. SATURDAY, June 14. ard. this, among other resolutions, which were afterwards concurred in by the vote of the House, the committee state that, "According to the law, as it now stands, the duty of selectStand-ing the banks, and of prescribing the securities to be taken, is devolved upon the Secretary of the Treasury under the supervision of the President. This power has been heretofore exercised by the head of the Treasury Department, and in a manner advantageous to the Mr. BINNEY expressed his approval of so public; and it is not doubted, if the law should much of its provisions as went to fix the relative continue unchanged, that it may and will convalue of gold and silver; but as strongly dis- tinue to be so exercised by the head of that sented from the remaining features of the bill Department; yet it is the opinion of the comin relation to the fractional coins of the eagle mittee that discretionary power should never and the dollars. These the bill proposed to be given, in any case, to any officer of the debase by too large a portion of alloy, thereby Government, where it can be regulated and degiving the country a base currency in part. He fined by law. They think that it would be more considered it quite too late in the session to consistent with the principles of our Governenter on the discussion of the delicate and diffi- ment for Congress to regulate, by law, the cult questions involved in this part of the sub-mode of selecting the fiscal agents, the securi ject. The opinions of the late Secretary of the Treasury, of Mr. Gallatin, and of the director of the mint, were all decidedly opposed to the policy of debasing the currency. He admitted that there was an able report in its favor; but he could not assent to its policy. On motion of Mr. WHITE, of New York, the committee then proceeded to consider the bill 66 regulating the value of certain gold coins within the United States." Mr. WHITE briefly explained. This part of the bill went on the principle of allowing to the Government a seigniorage to cover the expense of coining. He denied that it was debasing the currency. The legal tender was restricted to 10 dol ties proper to be taken, the duties they shall be required to perform, and the terms on which they shall be employed.' The opinion, here expressed, of the actual powers of the Executive, under the existing law, was founded not only upon a careful examination of the law itself, but upon the construction given to it, the uniform acquiescence in that construction, and the practice under it, from the earliest periods of the Government, and running through every administration, down |