Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

H. of R.]

The Public Deposites.

[FEB. 19, 184

McKinley, McLene, McVean, Miller, Henry Mitchell, tine, Heath, Hiester, J. W. Huntington, William Cest Robert Mitchell, Muhlenberg, Murphy, Osgood, Page, Johnson, Lay, Lewis, Love, Martindale, Marshall, McCoParks, Parker, Patterson, D. J. Pearce, Peyton, Franklin mas, McDuffie, McKennan, Mercer, Milligan, Moure, Pierce, Pierson, Polk, Pope, Schenck, Schley, Schinn, Pinckney, Potts, jun., Ramsay, Reed, Rencher, Willan C. Slade, Smith, Speight, Standifer, Stoddert, Suther- B. Shepard, A. H. Shepperd, W. Slade, Sloane, Spa land, William Taylor, Francis Thomas, Thomson, Turner, ler, P. Thomas, Tompkins, Tweedy, Vance, Vinton, WatTurrill, Vanderpoel, Van Houten, Wagener, Ward, Ward- mough, E. D. White, F. Whittlesey, E. Whittlesey, well, Wayne, Webster, Whallon, Campbell P. White.-Wilde, Williams, Wilson, Wise, Young.--98.

116.

Mr. JONES, of Georgia, asked the unanimous conse:
of the House to offer a resolution for the instruction of the
Committee of Ways and Means. Refused.
On motion, the House adjourned.

NAYS.-Messrs. J. Q. Adams, Heman Allen, John J. Allen, Chilton Allan, Archer, Ashley, Banks, Barber, Barnitz, Barringer, Baylies, Beaty, James M. Bell, Binney, Briggs, Bull, Burd, Burges, Cage, Chambers, Chilton, Chinn, Choate, Claiborne, William Clark, Clayton, ClowWEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 19. ney, Corwin, Coulter, Crane, Crockett, Darlington, W. R. Davis, Amos Davis, Davenport, Deberry, Deming, DenPUBLIC DEPOSITES. ny, Dennis, Dickson, Duncan, Evans, Edward Everett, The House resumed the consideration of the resolutio Horace Everett, Ewing, Felder, Fillmore, Foot, Foster, moved by Mr. MARDIS on the 14th January, when Mr. M Philo C. Fuller, Fulton, Gamble, Gholson, Gilmer, Gor-modified the same to read as follows: don, Gorham, Graham, Grayson, Grennell, jun., Griffin, "Resolved, That the Committee of Ways and Mess Hiland Hall, Hard, Hardin, James Harper, Hazeltine, be instructed to inquire into the expediency of reporting Heath, Hiester, Jabez W. Huntington, Wm. C. Johnson, a bill requiring the Secretary of the Treasury to deposic Seaborn Jones, King, Lay, Lewis, Love, Loyall, Martin- the public moneys of the United States in the State banks dale, Marshall, John Y. Mason, McComas, McDuffie, Mc-and, also, as to the expediency of defining, by law, al Kennan, Mercer, Milligan, Moore, Patton, Pinckney, contracts hereafter to be made with the Secretary for the Plummer, Potts, jun., Ramsay, Reed, Rencher, Selden, safe-keeping, management, and disbursement of the same. William B. Shepard, A. H. Shepperd, William Slade, Sloane, Spangler, William P. Taylor, Philemon Thomas, Tompkins, Tweedy, Vance, Vinton, Watmough, E. D. White, F. Whittlesey, E. Whittlesey, Wilde, Williams, Wilson, Wise, Young.-112.

Mr. C. C. CLAY asked the yeas and nays on the main question, and they were ordered.

The main question, on the motion of Mr. POLK to refer the letter of the Secretary of the Treasury to the Committee of Ways and Means, was then taken, and decided in the affirmative, as follows:

Mr. MARDIS said, in submitting his views in support of the resolution just read, he would not feel himself ca ed upon to prove that the Treasury was an Executive De partment; or to defend the President against the charge of having violated the constitution, in the removal of Mr. Taney's predecessor; or of having violated all law, by d recting the public deposites to be removed from the Bank of the United States. Neither would he stop to inquire whether or not the Chief Magistrate had acted correctly in this transaction. He needs no aid of mine to rescue his character from imputations of this kind: a long life, spent YEAS.--Messrs. John Adams, William Allen, Baylies, in the performance of the most honorable and important Beale, Bean, Beardsley, Beaumont, John Bell, James Blair, services of his country, furnishes his greatest securit John Blair, Bockee, Bodle, Boon, Brown, Bunch, Burns, Neither would he investigate the reasons of the Secretary Bynum, Cambreleng, Carmichael, Carr, Casey, Chaney, for the removal of the deposites from the United St Chinn, Samuel Clark, Clay, Coffee, Connor, Coulter, Cra- Bank, or inquire into the truth of the charges made mer, Davenport, Day, Philemon Dickerson, David W. against the bank. His views on these topics were su Dickinson, Dunlap, Ewing, Forester, Fowler, William K. ciently indicated by his recorded votes on the propose Fuller, Galbraith, Gholson, Gillet, Gilmer, Joseph Hall, sent to the Committee of Ways and Means. He had Thomas H. Hall, Halsey, Hamer, Hannegan, J. M. Harper, troduced this resolution, from the thorough convict Harrison, Hathaway, Hawkins, Hawes, Henderson, Howell, that the public deposites would not be restored to the Hubbard, Abel Huntington, Inge, Jarvis, Richard M. John- Bank of the United States, and from a settled belief th son, Noadiah Johnson, Cave Johnson, Seaborn Jones, the bank would not be rechartered. If he were righ Benjamin Jones, Kavanagh, King, Kinnard, Lane, Lan- these suppositions, then it would seem to follow, as a c sing, Laporte, Lawrence, Lea, Leavitt, Loyall, Lucas, sequence, that new depositories should be provided by Lyon, Lytle, Abijah Mann, jun., Joel K. Mann, Mardis, law. Before he proceeded further, he would ask, was John Y. Mason, Moses Mason, McCarty, McIntire, McKay, correct in the conclusion that the Bank of the Un McKim, McKinley, McLene, McVean, Miller, Henry States would not be rechartered, or the deposites restor Mitchell, Robert Mitchell, Muhlenberg, Murphy, Osgood, ed? In confirmation of what he had said, he begged ger Page, Parks, Parker, Patton, Patterson, Pearce, Peyton, tlemen to refer to the state of public opinion in reference Pierce, Pierson, Plummer, Polk, Pope, Schenck, Schley, to the renewal of the charter of the bank at the session Selden, Shinn, Charles Slade, Smith, Speight, Standifer, 1832. The subject at that time had not been gener Stoddert, Sutherland, William Taylor, William P. Taylor, agitated among the people. We could alone learn Francis Thomas, Thomson, Turner, Turrill, Vanderpoel, Van Houten, Wagener, Ward, Wardwell, Wayne, Webster, Whallon, C. P. White.-131.

wishes of the people through their representatives the on this floor; and what was their sense on this subject, as NAYS.--Messrs. J. Q. Adams, Heman Allen, John J. a decid then expressed through their representatives? Had any Allen, Chilton Allan, Archer, Ashley, Banks, Barber, majority in favor of renewing the charter of the bass, Barnitz, Barringer, Bates, Beaty, James M. Bell, Binney, and that, too, without either an investigation into its tran Briggs, Bull, Burd, Burges, Cage, Chambers, Chilton, actions, or a discussion of its principles. He presumed! Choate, Claiborne, William Clark, Clayton, Clowney, Cor the wishes of the members at that time corresponded with win, Crane, Crockett, Darlington, Warren R. Davis, A. those of the people; they were in favor of the bank Davis, Deberry, Deming, Denny, Dennis, John Dickson, There were, however, men then-a few-who raised ther forgotten Duncan, Evans, Edward Everett, Horace Everett, Felder, warning voices against the giant. Had any one Fillmore, Foot, Foster, Philo C. Fuller, Fulton, Gamble, the indictment filed against the bank by the honorable Gordon, Gorham, Graham, Grayson, Grennell, jun, gentleman from Georgia? [Mr. CLAYTON.] Can ang b Griffin, Hiland Hall, Hard, Hardin, James Harper, Hazel- that heard his predictions at the time of exhibiting his b

FEB. 19, 1834.]

The Public Deposites.

[H. of R.

do him the injustice to say that he is not a prophet worthy gentleman's allegations against the bank; they have pro of all honor? He had the specifications before him, seven nounced a verdict of guilty. If proof of this fact be requir in number, and all of grave import; any one of which, if ed, he referred gentlemen to the re-election of the Prestrue, would be sufficient to destroy public confidence in the ident of the United States, in opposition to the extraordiinstitution. He felt that it was due to the reputation of nary exertions of the bank. He called their attention to the distinguished gentleman from Georgia that the House the change of public sentiment, as indicated on this floor. should be put in possession of them. Mr. M. proceeded to read them as follows:

"1. The illegal issue of seven millions of branch bank orders as currency.

"2. Usurious contracts, relative to depreciated bank notes, at the West.

He begged gentlemen to contrast public opinion in the States of New York, Pennsylvania, and Ohio, as expressed individually, and through their legislators, two years since, with their wishes now, as communicated to this House through the same channels. The indictment of the gentleman from Georgia had been sustained by the people "Mr. CLAYTON read a part of the reported case in the from Maine to Mobile, as also by a large and decided United States Supreme Court, Bank of the United States majority of the members on this floor. Now, what did he vs. Owings et al., which proved, he said, a distinct case of hear? He understood it to be the wish of the gentleman usury; and there were many other instances in Ohio and from Georgia to enter a nolle prosequi in favor of the culKentucky, involving nearly a million of dollars in each of prit. Mr. M. said he protested against his right to do so. those States.

"3. The practice of compelling borrowers to draw domestic bills at a usurious discount, in cases where simple loans of money were requested.

"4. The non-user of the charter from 1819 to 1829, in not issuing notes from the branches of the South and West.

This may be considered a proper practice in Georgia, but he doubted whether the principle would be recognised as sound elsewhere, (if there.) He denied the right of the gentleman to move the discharge of the convict before an infliction of the penalties of the law. Was he not sustained, (asked Mr. M.,) by the facts here adduced, that there had been a great change in public opinion against the bank since the session of 1832 If any thing was yet wanting, if further proof should be required, he would refer gentlemen to the vote of this House on the resolu"6. Of the capital stock, there was not a due proportion at the last session of Congress in reference to the tion of coin. He said the Government deposites were $16,000,000, those of individuals $8,000,000; the circulation above $20,000,000. To meet all of these, they had not more than $7,000,000.

5. Building houses for rent. Mr. C. contended that purchases of plantations, or any speculations in real estate, were contrary to the charter.

their constituents as did the members of the last Congress. Then he would take it for granted that, at this time, there were, both in and out of this House, a decided majority opposed either to the restoration of the deposites, or to a renewal of the United States Bank charter.

safety of the deposites, and contrast the then vote with the vote of yesterday on the same subject. At the last session, two-thirds of this House voted that they were safe in the Bank of the United States. How was it on yesterday? "7. Foreigners voting for directors through trustees." Near two-thirds of this body said that the deposites were At the time that the honorable gentleman submitted the not safe in the United States Bank. He presumed that above charges against the bank, he accompanied them the representatives now on this floor as truly represented with the declaration that he confidently believed that they were all true, and that, if Congress would raise and send to Philadelphia a committee, with power to send for persons and papers, he would establish each and every one of them to the satisfaction of Congress and the American people. The gentleman did not stop here; but, But we are informed by gentlemen that there is to be with a prophetic eye, he ventured to predict that the de-a great change of public opinion on this subject. An struction of the bank would be the consequence of the unheard-of reaction is expected. The people are tolddisclosures that the proposed examination would expose to modestly told-that they are laboring under a delusion in the view of a hitherto incredulous community. The com-relation to the oppressions of the United States Bank; mittee was raised, and invested with full power to inves-that all its alleged usurpations are without a shadow of tigate the transactions of the bank; the gentleman from foundation; all slanders upon the bank concocted and Georgia was placed at the head of the committee. He propagated by the President and his minions, as a pretext proceeded to Philadelphia, spent many weeks in making to seize upon the pursestrings of this nation. The peohis investigations, and what did he tell us had been the result? Why, that he had found abundant proof to sustain, not only every charge in his bill of indictment, but many more. He presented us with a volume of evidence in support of this declaration, which was, by order of this House, printed, and sent into every portion of this country. This volume of testimony, followed up by another important document at the same session, had the effect to rouse the public mind to a just sense of the dangerous character of the institution.

ple are to be enlightened on the subject of their rights by this body. Yes, sir, they are promised deliverance from the oppressions of the tyrant Jackson. And by whom? The gentleman from Georgia and the gentleman from Virginia, [Mr. ARCHER;] both highly respectable, and very capable of enlightening the community on this and all other subjects. But what relation do these distinguished individuals bear to the subject before us? We have seen the gentleman from Georgia's indictment filed, and now on record, against the bank; we have seen his vote reDoes any one doubt that the charges then brought corded, saying that the United States Bank was not a safe against the bank were fully sustained? Assuredly the gen- depository for the public money. And he found, on extleman from Georgia does not; for we find him at the last amination of the journal of the last session, that the genCongress, many months after the publication of his book, tleman from Virginia [Mr. ARCHER] voted with the genprosecuting his original indictment, in an amended form. tleman from Georgia that the Bank of the United States On the passage of the resolution declaring the Bank of was not a safe depository for the treasure of the nation. the United States a safe depository for the public mo- Now, he asked, would it be just, would it be proper, or neys, we find the honorable gentleman acting in opposi- would it be right, to give to the President all the glory, tion to the resolution. Yes, sir, he said, as late as a few all the honor, of having exposed to public view the dandays before the adjournment of the last session of Con- gerous tendency and corruptions of an institution that gress, that the United States Bank was not a safe deposi-bids defiance alike to the constitution and the rightful tory for the public money. What, sir, has been the result guardians of the rights and liberties of the people? Sir, of all these investigations by Congress and the people? A (said Mr. M.) I can do no such violence to my conscience. large majority of the whole community have sustained the Both of the gentlemen are entitled to share with the Pres

H. OF R.]

The Public Deposites.

[FEB. 19, 1834.

ident whatever of glory or honor he may have acquired money-panic in the country. The bank is fully able, by opposing this monster of corruption. Did not the without the deposites, to grant the same amount of ac gentlem in from Virginia say, by his vote at the last ses-commodations to its customers that it did formerly: bet sion, that the Bank of the United States was an unsafe it is not the policy of the bank to do so. A renewal of its depository of the public money? His constituents con- charter is the leading object with the bank; every othe fided in him-the country confided in him; they had a consideration is made subservient to this. The comm right to do so. Can he now tell a confiding community nity, or that portion of it that have private capital, are that he was mistaken; that, at the last session, he acted fearful to make investments until a decision is made by without information? No. The volume of testimony then Congress upon the proposition now pending. So soo before the House and the nation would contradict any dec-as that decision shall be made, capital will again perform, laration of the kind. No, sir: he said that the money was to the trading community, its accustomed office. If he unsafe in the Bank of the United States, because he hon-restoration of the deposites afforded any present rehe estly believed that it was unsafe. Had any thing occurred (which he very much doubted,) he thought it quite certa since that time calculated to do away the force of the that it would bring upon the country fourfold distress at the evidence upon which the gentleman acted? Nothing had expiration of the charter. A speedy decision of the ques transpired, within his knowledge; and yet we find not only tion would be the greatest possible relief to the country these, but several other gentlemen, now advocating a Mr. M. hoped that he had succeeded in proving that he restoration of the deposites, that had heretofore been first position taken by gentlemen opposed to the recharter violently opposed to the bank. Now, sir, patients do not of the bank, and now in favor of a restoration of the depos usually apply twice to a physician-first for a prescription, ites, was unsound. He would next inquire if the fact, that and then for a relief from its operation. The same doc- the enemies of the bank are now united with its friends on tors that brought the disease upon the country (if disease the question of the deposites, would be calculated to p it be) now tell the people, not that they themselves were duce a reaction in favor of the bank? In my judgment, deceived, but attempt to throw the whole responsibility (said Mr. M.) it must have directly a contrary tendency, upon the Executive. Will the people trust them? Will On one side, it is said, we cannot get along without they not, at least, before they take their counsel, endea- United States Bank; that the institution is essential to the vor to cultivate some little acquaintance with them? Will existence of the republic; that the Bank of the United they not likely institute an inquiry into the political tenets States is the life-blood and soul of our political system of gentlemen who offer to give to them this new light? What are the views of the gentlemen who have now joined Will they not compare their present opinions and course them? They say the bank is unconstitutional, inexpewith their former opinions? What would likely be the dient, and that the happiness of the people and the sta result of this investigation? They would find gentlemen, bility of our institutions depend upon the abolition of the now, violent against the President for doing the very act bank. Is not this a singular contradiction of opinion that they said should have been done more than nine Doubtless they were all honest. But does it not fill the months since. On learning this fact, would not the mind mind with astonishment to see gentlemen entertaining naturally suggest this question to these gentlemen-what such opposite opinions voting together? The truth did you intend or design when you voted that the depos-must be told here as well as elsewhere, and the people ites were not safe in the United States Bank? Did you have a right to know these facts; they have a right to mean thereby to convey the idea to your constituents that know who it is that had condemned the removal of the they were safe, or the contrary? And, if you deemed deposites as a lawless usurpation of power. But it d them unsafe, where did you design to place them? And, been said by gentlemen from a certain quarter that the further, if you then deemed the deposites unsafe in the legal and vested rights of the bank had been violat Bank of the United States, and invited the Secretary of by the removal of the deposites; and that they felt called the Treasury to withdraw them, why is it that you now upon, from a sense of justice to the bank, as also a sense denounce him for doing that which you said the public of duty, to restore to the bank its chartered rights. Th good required to be done? If (said Mr. M.) he had is strange doctrine, coming from the quarter it does! misrepresented the past or present opinions or course of ill comported with what he had understood to be the gentlemen on the other side of the question, he had done favorite theory of the gentlemen. He had, up to this it unintentionally. But were the gentlemen to whom he time, understood their doctrine to be, that an unconstit had alluded in favor of rechartering the bank? He be- tional law was, in point of fact, no law at all; that it was lieved not; he had heard from them no declaration to that ipso facto, void; consequently, no right could vest by ope effect; he understood that they unhesitatingly pronounced ration of such a law. He had understood that the of Stre the Bank of the United States unconstitutional. And yet this principle that gentlemen predicated the right of State they were in favor of restoring the deposites to an uncon- conventions at pleasure to declare void, and to rende tis stitutional bank! Gentlemen say that their object in re-operative upon their citizens, any law of Congress turning, at this time, to the bank the public deposites, is they might adjudge to be unconstitutional. Heberg to relieve the public distress. the proposed measure would likely effect the object. If State had attempted to exempt her citizens from tuy Let us examine whether derstood that it was upon this theory that a sovereig the removal of the deposites had done to the community rations of the late tariff laws. He would respectfull the injury that had been charged upon that act, he would quire if there was any difference, so far as legal ng ask if it would afford any relief now to return them? Would were involved, between rights acquired under an unco we not have to pass through the same scene of distress and stitutional tariff law, and an unconstitutional bank charter suffering in 1836, if the bank is not to be rechartered? If the one could not vest rights, neither could the other; Taking their own assumptions as to the causes of the pres- if either did, then he held that no power on earth could ent distress as true, he would ask gentlemen what the or dared disregard them. Do not gentlemen perceive that, community would gain by restoring the deposites? Would by admitting the bank charter to be unconstitutional, and not the condition of the country be greatly prejudiced by contending, at the same time, that the stockholders had such a measure? Let us now begin to prepare to meet the acquired vested rights which they are not at liberty to 3d day of March, 1836. The restoration of the deposites disregard, they surrender the right of State interpo would not have the effect to restore public confidence insition-its right to render null and void an unconstitutions! the bank, unless it would be deemed a sufficient assurance law? Mr. M. said that he rested the defence of the Pres fling amount taken from the bank that had produced the only adduced the above argument to expose what seemed that the bank would be rechartered. It was not the tri-ident and Secretary upon much higher ground, and had

[ocr errors]

FEB. 19, 1834.]

The Public Deposites.

[H. OF R.

to him to be a gross inconsistency. In opposing the present appropriation by law. He had likewise met and contracourse of the Executive, gentlemen have entirely changed dicted the charge that the Chief Magistrate had laid hold their opinions on this point. He would not attempt to ac- of the public treasury, with a view to corrupt the people, count for this extraordinary change; it would be improper to manage elections, and thus to control public opinion. were he to do so. This he would, however, say, that he The removal of the deposites, it was said, was unauthordid not well comprehend how it was that gentlemen had ized, and prompted by the President. Now, sir, (said introduced into the leading debate on this question the Mr. M.,) I had promised, at the commencement of my resubject of magicians; now, he apprehended, if one party marks, not to go into an examination of the sufficiency of had its magicians, so had all the others: each had their the reasons assigned by the Secretary for the removal of leaders and wire-workers. Gentlemen on the other side, the deposites. But he trusted that it would not be contherefore, did not so much object to the use of magic as to sidered a breach of promise if he attempted to show that the superior skill of the magicians opposed to them; they the Secretary of the Treasury was not restricted, in his feared that their own magicians were not of the order of power to remove them, to one class of reasons. The opAaron; and methinks, Mr. Speaker, that they are fearful position have exhausted all their learning, ingenuity, and that Martin's serpent will swallow up all of theirs. He abilities to prove that the discretion of the Secretary over would not pretend to say that he was right in this supposi- the deposites is limited by the bank charter to their tion, or that his views corresponded with those of any other safety. It had been said that the Secretary's guardiangentleman on this floor. It would be uncharitable to sup- ship over the public treasure extended no further than to pose any gentleman capable of legislating in reference to enable him to withdraw the money belonging to the treas men; neither would he be understood as impeaching the ury from the Bank of the United States, whenever their motives of any gentleman. But of this he felt certain, that safety might, from any cause, be endangered. And this the American people would never consent to be made a it had been contended, was a sound construction of the party to any contest, the sole object of which was to put bank charter. As a whole, (Mr. M. said,) he thought it up one man and to pull down another. Principle alone fair to presume that, if this position could be shown to be should and does govern a large majority of the people of unsound and untenable, gentlemen on the other side this country, in all their sentiments on public topics; there would surrender at discretion. By entrenching themcould be no community of feeling between the people and selves behind this argument, and bringing all their powers politicians who suffer considerations merely personal to to bear on this point, he inferred that gentlemen had control their acts. The intelligence of the people, he abandoned all others. Indeed, every thing must depend thought, had been greatly underrated; and, were he not on their sustaining this construction of the bank charter; greatly mistaken, gentlemen who rely for success on their for if the Secretary had a right to remove the deposites own ability to control public sentiment, and presume upon for reasons other than those connected with their imme. the ignorance of the community, will be destined to a short diate safety, then it would be conceded on all hands that existence. In the other end of the capitol there were in- the reasons assigned were abundantly sufficient to authordividuals who might profit by this suggestion. The peo-ize the act. Air. M. said he would read from the bank ple understand their rights, and would never suffer them charter the section which authorized the Secretary of the to be sported with by politicians for party purposes. If Treasury to remove the deposites, &c. "That the degentlemen should learn to place more confidence in the posites of the money of the United States, in places in people, and presume less on their own abilities to manage which the said bank or branches thereof may be estaband control them, he would venture the assertion that the lished, shall be made in said bank or branches thereof, country would be quite as ably and faithfully represented. unless the Secretary of the Treasury shall at any time otherIn any view in which he (Mr. M.) had been able to wise order and direct," &c. It would seem, from the readsee this subject, his mind had been led irresistibly to the ing of this section, that the power of removal was a geneconclusion that the deposites would not be restored, or ral one, to be exercised at the discretion of the Secretary. the bank rechartered. This understanding of the sub- But it had been said that other portions of the charter ject brought him to the consideration of the main object limit and control this section, so as to justify the construcof the resolution. Before he entered upon the discussion tion contended for. Now, (said Mr. M.) I propose to of this branch of the subject, he begged leave to notice examine the correctness of the principle insisted on, and a charge that had been brought against the President and to test the soundness of the argument of gentlemen by an Secretary. He knew that it must have been intended for application of their own rule. He would presume that effect in the country. The President had been charged the power conferred by Congress on the Secretary over with having seized upon the pursestrings of this nation. the deposites was designed to answer some sensible and What idea was this declaration intended to convey to this valuable purpose; yet he was prepared to demonstrate, to community? Either that the President had been actually the satisfaction of any candid, unprejudiced mind, that, if guilty of disbursing the public money without law, or of the Secretary's right to remove the deposites or withhold using it with a view to corrupt the public mind, and for them from the Bank of the United States were restricted electioneering purposes. Now, sir, is there any one so to the simple inquiry, Are they safe? the provision of ignorant as to put the least confidence in charges so desti- the charter under consideration would be without either tute of truth? There was not an individual on this floor sense or value; and, further, that the power given to the that believed any such thing. The people can never be Secretary over the deposites would be no security to the made to believe it; for, in point of fact, it is untrue. public treasure. [Here Mr. M. read from the bank charDoes the simple removal of the deposites from one bank to another produce the effect of giving the President any new powers over the public treasury? Had the Executive attempted the exercise of any new power?

[Here the remarks of Mr. M. were broken off by the expiration of the hour assigned to the consideration of resolutions. Mr. M. on a subsequent day resumed his remarks as follows:]

ter, section 16: "That the bills or notes of the said corporation originally made payable, or which shall become payable on demand, shall be receivable in all payments to the United States, unless otherwise directed by act of Congress."] Now, gentlemen contend that the Secretary can alone refuse to deposite in the Bank of the United States when it would be unsafe to do so. Would this power be any security to the treasury of the nation? When He was defending (he said) the President of the is it likely that it would be unsafe to trust the public United States from the charge of having seized upon moneys in the United States Bank? Assuredly, when it the purse of the nation; and had adverted to the fact that had failed to pay specie for its notes; when its paper had he could not take one cent from the treasury without an depreciated in value; when public confidence had been

H. or R.]

The Public Deposites.

[FEB. 19, 184

shaken in the management and solvency of the institution; ence that it is capable of exercising, and does exercise, then, and not till then, would the Secretary have a right, over the whole country, render it indispensable. We according to the doctrine of gentlemen, to withdraw the are advised that this bank is necessary to insure to the hpublic deposites from the Bank of the United States, and borer the reward of his labor. We are told, in a work, then only for the safety of the public revenue. Now, let that the enterprise and industry of every portion of this us suppose all this derangement, of which he had been Union is at the mercy of the bank. Yes, sir, we hear the speaking, in the affairs of the bank, to take place in the arrogant declaration, this alarming fact, from the most recess of Congress; and that the Secretary changes the distinguished advocates of the bank on this floor. How place of deposite to the State banks: would the safety of is this made manifest? They say that the bank under the public treasure be secured thereby? No. The Sec- stands the interests of the country so well; knows the retary, we have seen, is compelled to receive, in payment points where, at particular seasons, capital will be of the revenues of the Government, the notes of the Bank quired; and has such extraordinary facilities through to of the United States, until Congress otherwise direct by branches, that it is able to transfer its capital from che law. Would not the removal of the deposites, under such place to another, so as to meet the emergencies of the circumstances, be altogether nugatory, and fail to effect business community; and in this way regulates not only the the purpose of securing them? Would not the Govern- currency, but the price of labor and the value of its prement be compelled to receive in payment of all public ducts. Now, sir, carry out this argument. If the bank, dues the depreciated bills of the Bank of the United at will, controls the enterprise and industry of this coun States, unless Congress could legislate upon the subject? try, it can control at pleasure the elective franchise. If And could it be an object with the United States, whether it has the power now to enforce a renewal of its charter, this depreciated, valueless paper were deposited in the he would ask whether, if at some future day, when its one or the other bank? He contended that this view of friends and enemies come in conflict for the first office a the subject was alone sufficient to prove either that the the gift of the American people, it would not have it in construction contended for was not the true one, or that its power (by the employment of the same means) to put the section of law under consideration was designed by down its foes, and sustain its friends? It could control the Congress to answer no sensible or valuable purpose. He elections by the same means that it had already resorted would take it for granted that the Secretary's power of to, with a view to force the community and this House to control over the public treasury was not limited as con-yield to its demands. Are not these assumptions on the tended for; that a much more extended discretion over part of the bank at war with the spirit and genius of our the subject was intended to be confided to the Secretary institutions, and subversive of the liberties of the people? by the charter. Then, sir, if the Secretary has the right If the bank had already so interwoven itself, and become to withdraw the deposites from the Bank of the United so closely connected with our institutions, and so identified States, for reasons other than those connected with their with the enterprise and industry of the country, that its safety, does not the main argument which is urged against amputation would destroy the whole body politic, then, him fall harmless to the ground? Then, had there been Mr. M. said he gave up all as lost. Its power had alno cause for the act of the Secretary? There had been ready overshadowed the liberties of the people; it is withabundant reason; and he contended that the existence of out compass, without bounds. Mr. M. said, though doubt. adequate causes had been conceded by the argument em- less the bank was anxious to acquire the power attributed ployed on the other side. The President and Secretary to it, he was of opinion that it had not as yet succeeded. had realized the wishes and expectations of the country, He knew that its attempt to destroy the right of free saf and we have evidence conclusive of this fact on our tables. frage had been promptly met and put down by a highWe have before us the voice of the people from Maine to minded, virtuous, and patriotic people. He thought, on Louisiana, approving and concurring in what had been investigation, it would be found that (although its powers done. Thus, neither the President nor Secretary had been are acknowledged to be very great) the friends of the guilty of a wanton usurpation of power. But is it true bank were mistaken in the supposition that the price of la that either the President or Secretary is desirous to re-bor and the value of property were subjected to the whims tain the discretion over the public moneys which had de- or caprice of the United States Bank. And, if such were volved upon the latter, in the honest and faithful discharge the case, it behooved every American to free his country of his obligations to the country? Is any individual or from an irresponsible institution possessed of powers so party desirous of leaving the public treasure in the hands extraordinary, and so very dangerous to the peace and of the Secretary, to be deposited in the State banks at his prosperity of the country. Let us see whether this instidiscretion? He had heard of no one that wished any such tution will bear amputation. He would ask the sugar thing. From his humble station, and more humble pre-planter of Louisiana in what manner he was paid for his tensions, he had but little intercourse with those to whose sugar? The answer would be, that nine-tenths of the str hands the administration of our Government had been gar was paid for in bills on local banks. The growt committed; but he had heard from no one that it was de-of cotton in Mississippi and Alabama will tell you that sired by the Secretary that the deposites should be left they are paid in notes on local banks for nine-tenths of subject to his management without further legislation. If their cotton. He would appeal to every one conversant he were to venture an opinion, he would say that he did with the course of business the States named to sustain wish legislation, and speedy legislation, on the subject. He him in this assertion. And what does this prove? Wh called on gentlemen who had manifested so much anxiety, directly the opposite of the declaration of the friends of

so much solicitude, lest the Secretary should use, or at- the bank, "that the Bank of the United States is indistempt to use, the public moneys with a view to corrupt pensable to enable the merchant to buy and carry to and abuse the public mind for party purposes, to go with market the products of the country." It proves drapi him in passing a law regulating and controlling this whole that, wherever there is demand, there will be found capi rable to change the destination of the public deposites,rity in trusting to the competition of enterprising citizens subject. But, sir, it is said that, though it may be desi-tal equal to that demand; and there is much greater secu

moneyed

and though the country may be solicitous to rid itself of for a certain reward of our industry, than to a the Bank of the United States, yet, such is the present corporation. Then let us part with this institution. Here condition of the country, that it is impracticable to do he might be asked if he contemplated a substitute for the of the Bank of the United States, and its connexion with|firmative. He proposed, as a substitute, the State banks. either. We are informed that the peculiar organization Bank of the United States? He would answer in the af the business transactions of the community, and the influ-It was with this view that he introduced the resolution

« ZurückWeiter »